From the Associated Press’ Sex Offender Banned from Son’s Graduation (5/10/08):
“School and law enforcement officials have told a St. Joseph man that he can’t attend his son’s eighth-grade graduation because he is a convicted sex offender and isn’t allowed on school property.
“James Jones, 36, said he may go anyway although the Buchanan County Sheriff’s Department has told him he would be arrested and face up to four years in prison.
“‘I’ve already been punished for this. This isn’t about me anymore. Now they’re punishing my kids, and that’s taking it a little too far,’ said Jones, who served five years in prison after being convicted in 1990 of forcible rape of a 15-year-old girl when he was 17.
“‘I’m always preaching education to my children. How does that make me look if I’m not there at graduation?’..
“Sheriff’s investigator Shawn Collie said although Jones has argued against the school property restriction more than any other offender, he has signed an agreement acknowledging he knows about the restriction. That means he can’t claim ignorance if found on school grounds, such as for the May 22 graduation.
“‘We’ll be there. And we’ll arrest him if he’s there,’ Collie said.”
A few thoughts:
1) Regarding the rape, he was convicted, so let’s assume he’s guilty. “Forcible rape” is pretty bad stuff, and it’s real hard to feel sorry for a rapist. Yes, Jones was only 17, and that’s young, but it’s old enough to know it’s wrong to cause other people pain. And I’m sure that two decades later the young woman he assaulted still suffers because of it.
2) Prison is supposed to be about punishment and rehabilitation. Rape is a terrible crime, but Jones paid for it with five long years in prison–upon his release, he’s paid his debt to society and should not be subjected to further punishment.
3) The best thing for society is if criminals are able to be rehabilitated, and from what we see in the article, it sounds as if Jones is an excellent and admirable example of this rehabilitation. For this, Jones deserves credit, not exile.
4) It probably will mean a lot to his son for him to be at his graduation, and will be hurtful if he can’t attend.
All in all, I side with Jones.
Glenn Sacks, www.GlennSacks.com
[Note: If you or someone you love is faced with a divorce or needs help with child custody, child support, false accusations, Parental Alienation, or other family law or criminal law matters, ask Glenn for help by clicking here.]
{ 20 comments }
Also consider that we are repeatedly told that rape is about power more than sex, and it is quite possible to reform about power trips. Also, his crime was not exactly pedophilia, now was it?
Â
The cops will have no option but to arrest him if he shows up, especially with the media watching. As to what happens in court, should the DA (or whomever) decide to actually prosecute…
I don’t think not letting someone who has forcbly raped a 15 yo girl onto school property is beyond the pale. Seems like a pretty sensible thing.Â
Further, it is the law. While his teaching his son about the importance of education is laudable, perhaps some lessons on obeying the law, and having to live with the consequences of your actions is appropriate as well. And along with prison, on of the consequences of forcible rape is that all manner of people won’t want you around them. Sometimes, this as in this case, this will be codified into law in certain situations.Â
Frankly, I don’t have a lot of sympathy. If this was simply a statutory rape case, we might be able to talk about overbroad definitions of ‘sex offender’ but that isn’t the case here. He is a rapist of a young girl. That he was only in prison for 5 years seems the real injustice to me, not that he can’t go to a middle school graduation.Â
Dave Justus’s last blog post..California ban on same-sex marriage struck down
but Jones paid for it with five long years in prison–upon his release, he’s paid his debt to society… – Glenn
I keep hearing this argument made, can someone explain to me why punishments past the term of incarceration are not part of "the debt to society"?
I can understand why people may think the term of incarceration is too long (or short), or why people may think that a post incarceration punishment is too severe (or too lax). But I don’t understand why people say the post incarceration terms are not a part of the punishment.Â
for my part, i understand both the school’s and police’s perspective in this better than i understand jones’s. they just want everybody to be safe, and if that means somebody missing an 8th grade graduation (since when do 8th graders graduate to anything except 9th grade?) then them’s the breaks, so to speak.
the school’s policy is, in my view, totally appropriate for 99% of circumstances. however, they should exercise a little more common sense in this case. the graduation is going to be a well-attended (one would presume) event. what are the chances of jones doing some harm to somebody in full view of a crowded auditorium. in this case they should listen to their better angels and allow the exception.
Additionally, the claim that his kid is being punished isn’t persuasive to me. By this definition, any child who has a parent in jail is being punished. We do it all the time. So why not this one?
Rape is a power trip, and the fact that this convicted rapist is using his son’s graduation to play power and mind games with the authorities is the surest sign that he has not reformed.
No sympathy from me for Jones. He raped a girl, so… fu*k him. Pardon the pun.
Yu Ain – I have often wondered the exact same thing. To me it is clear that incarceration is only part of the debt to society. Is there a criminal/legal theory that makes a case otherwise? If so, I would love to hear it.
Glenn?
In all seriousness. Does Glenn actually comment here, or does he just post stuff?
jerry,
never personally seen him do more than post, but even without him the discussions can still be excellent.
I totally agree. But there are some occasions where it would be nice to engage the guy. Most of his stuff is rock solid in the "Yes, Glenn, I’m outraged too" category, like this one and the previous one about the guy serving jail time for his daughter not getting a GED. Sometimes, there is stuff like the Mother’s Day note from the 4 year old to her Dad. It would be nice to engage in discourse and figure out why he feels that is so bad. Also, it would be nice to know that if we share similarly outrageous stories in the comments, he actually may be reading them.
Jerry, I think he just advert… I mean posts. Never seen him in the comments.
Contributors are not required to mix it up in the comments, and do not always do so.
That is as true for me as anyone else. Sometimes I do, and sometimes I don’t participate.
Oh, and by the way, Glenn is a syndicated columnist, a talk radio host, and a frequent public speaker on these issues. Has been for years. I’m quite honored to have him here. He is doing absolutely nothing I object to or find inappropriate.
The thing that bugs me, is that when I read someone’s blog post and I have a take on it, I’d like to think that they at least READ my response.
But as you say he’s a syndicated columnist, talk host and public speaker. He posts multiple copies of the SAME blog post in different corners of the net. I’m just trying to understand that IF I were to say "Hey Glenn: blah, blah, blah" he’s actually out there reading it.
If that’s not the case, then say so. Is Glenn a co-blogger or not, or is it just some fancy RSS feed that’s posting with his name??
Please don’t misconstrue this as some sort of attack. It’s not. I’m genuinely curious.
jerry,
Actually, such bloggers are like driveby shooters. They are not interested in your or anyone else’s opinion. In that sense they are more than slightly behind the times. They do not understand the internet and are living in the days of ideological toxic newspeak.
The problem with Glenn Sacks is his contrived victimhood masquerading as the indignant defense of any and all men’s presumed rights.
Like, todays’ Cal Supreme court ruling just ended all heterosexual marriages, re-instated the 4000 fake nullified gay marriages by the Mayor/liberal messiah of Frisco.
But try to tell, Sacks, that no his heterosexual marriage nor anyone else’s will soon end because the the Alliance for Marriage Foundation told him so, is not on his listening schedule.
But somehow, this guy, Sacks seems to think s because he is syndicated he can just dump his stuff anywhere on the internet.
Oops,
No, the father should not violate the law by going to son’s 8th grade graduation unless he wants to assume it consequences.
Ok, I’ll play devil’s advocate. Does anyone really think that almost 20 years later the man is likely to attack another 15 year old? If not, what purpose is served by banning him from a heavily supervised event that takes place on school grounds? And, if so, why is he walking around in pubic with no supervision at all?
It makes me uncomfortable that anyone, no matter what the crime, can be punished by the state for the rest of their life. Especially since the post-prison part of the sentence can be imposed long after the crime, and usually seems to be some automatic thing that a jury has no control over. If we, as a society, have determined that the crime is worthy of life in prison or the death penalty then we need to get on with it. Otherwise let them do their time and return to society.
bcostin’s last blog post..He’ll be your friend forever! Whenever!
The problem with Glenn Sacks is his contrived victimhood masquerading as the indignant defense of any and all men’s presumed rights.
Mck – So true, LOL!
If we, as a society, have determined that the crime is worthy of life in prison or the death penalty then we need to get on with it. Otherwise let them do their time and return to society.
We, as a society, have decided that convicted rapists are a threat to society even after they’ve served their time. That’s why we, as a society, impose the "post-prison part of the sentence"
The point is not to ‘punish’, but to protect. If we view the justice system as a means of protecting the trust and freedom that a democratic society requires to function and thrive, this makes sense.
If a man has a restraining order placed upon him, and the person he is being restrained from is showing up to the graduation, should he be allowed to be within 500 ft of this person at the graduation?
No, he is breaking the law.
Since it is breaking the law for this person to go to the school for a graduation he too should not be allowed. I have many issues with the sex offender list and what it does to people. However, this does not mean we break the law to suit our own purposes.
"Does anyone really think that almost 20 years later the man is likely to attack another 15 year old?"
Here is one of my pet peeves about this system in place. How long does it freaking take to get off of a list? Also in my state it is almost impossible to determine what they guy did. I look up a person and it says, "Indecent exposure". Okay so was he a flasher? Was he having sex in a car (a past time that is honored and sacred, okay maybe not but fun)? Was he mooning his principal? All of these things get you a ticket like that. More detail in the conviction would be nice. Also there should be a point and time where the crime should not show up on the list. Everything else has a grace period where a clean record removes instances from public viewing (they can still be used in court) why not this?
Comments on this entry are closed.