You know that sex offender registry? Well some guy picked an offender at random and killed him

[Cali_Democrat]

and his wife:

Jeremy Moody Picked Sex Offender At Random, Killed Him: Police

COLUMBIA, S.C. -- A South Carolina man targeted a sex offender at random, killed him and his wife and later told deputies he planned to kill others on the state's sex registry, authorities said Wednesday.

Jeremy Moody and his wife, Christine, were arrested and charged with murder, Union County Sheriff David Taylor said.

Jeremy Moody confessed to the crime and told investigators they arrested him just in time, Taylor said.

"He planned to kill another sex offender on the register today," the sheriff said.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/24/jeremy-moody-sex-offender-killer_n_3647289.html?utm_hp_ref=crime

[bunnies]

1. Thats unfortunate.

But Im still 100% for the registry.

[kestrel91316]

2. Yeah, those registries are great. In this case they also allowed for

the guys wife to be killed!! How awesome is that???



I am noticing a trend in your posts that gives me pause........

[cyberswede]

6. According to my LEO relatives, the registry is pretty much pointless. nt

[bunnies]

34. Tell that to my bf's employer...

who has two sex offenders working for him. It allows him the knowledge to keep his young daughter away from them.

[elehhhhna]

39. and all the guys who plead out and/or haven't been caught yet...

does he have a l ist of them too? Just sayin'. They outnumber the registered ones btw. IMO the reg gives a false sense of security.

[bunnies]

54. you may be right about that.

But at least he knows what he knows, which is better than nothing.

[elehhhhna]

58. creppy thoguht right?

I 'bout jumped when one of our local deputies told me that!


Also WFIW, ere in TX the reg tells when and what the convicted charges were, so we get a bit of a clue

[Logical]

43. Any damn background check finds the same damn information

[bunnies]

56. But any damn background check isnt free. nt

[Logical]

59. His children are not worth $20? n-t

[bunnies]

8. What trend? Care to elaborate?

My bf works with two sex offenders and yeah, Im glad I get to see what they did. Makes me a horrible person I guess.

[bunnies]

19. Im still waiting for you to elaborate.

If youre going to accuse me of something, at least have the gall to tell me what it is.

[notadmblnd]

4. Yeah, he was convicted on III degree, so it cold have been a little as pissing in public

nt

[Cali_Democrat]

5. WOW. If you urinate in public, you have to register as a sex offender?

[Incitatus]

16. Yes, it's considered indecent exposure.

It can happen, depending on the cop/state/judge.

An 18 year old can also end up on the list for consensual sex with a 16/17 year old bf/gf.

[jberryhill]

51. Absolutely

My nearest "sex offender" mooned someone.

Public urinators make up a good chunk of the registries.

[Cali_Democrat]

63. When I was younger...

I cant even count the number of times I urinated in public when I was drunk.

Of course I usually went behind a dumpster or some other place away from a lot of people.

[jberryhill]

65. It's often tacked onto something else

Someone saw someone go down an alley or behind a dumpster to pee after engaging in some other disorderly behavior, sent a cop down after him and, lo and behold, he was exposing his penis.

Or the vice squad finding masturbators in a porn theater.

[bunnies]

9. What?! nt

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

7. As do I. The only person here to blame is the murderer. nt

[bunnies]

10. exactly. nt

[struggle4progress]

11. “In 2004, in Western Pennsylvania, a 15-year-old girl was charged with manufacturing

and disseminating child pornography for having taken nude photos of herself and (posting) them on the internet. She was charged as an adult, and as of 2012 was facing registration for life.”

Report details lives ruined for children put on sex-offender registries
Nudity, streaking, petting, not just rape, have led to youths put on sex-offender registries
By Susan Ferrissemail
6:00 am, May 1, 2013
Updated: 8:27 am, May 1, 2013
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013/05/01/12594/report-details-lives-ruined-children-put-sex-offender-registries

[bunnies]

17. I completely disagree

with the decision to charge her OR make her register. That is completely frigging absurd.

[jeff47]

36. But you're 100% for the registry.

This makes it sound like you aren't 100% for the registry.

Perhaps you're 100% for the registry in your mind, not the registry as it's actually implemented.

[bunnies]

57. You are correct.

Its something I hadn't considered.

[arely staircase]

22. my problem with it is (besides skinhead vigilantism)

it seems to make no distinction between the 18 year old who had sex with his 16 year old girlfriend and the guy showing his dick to kids on the playground or the violent stranger rapist. If there is some 35 year old man who pled guilty to statutory rape of a 16 year old when he was 18 and now she is 33 and they have been married for years and live down the street, that just doesn't concern me like an actual child molester or public masturbator would. And you have no way of knowing if you should actually be alarmed.

[bunnies]

25. I completely agree with you.

The definition of "sex offender" is far too broad. Im for a list of rapists and child molesters. Not flashers.

[kelliekat44]

3. He'll probably be able to use some SYG law and get off. Same with those who go after abortion docs.

Have gun...will kill. That's what this country is turning into.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

13. Or not.

If all you have is fabricating stories to scare yourself perhaps you need to reconsider whatever it is you're upset about.

[Pelican]

67. Welcome to the wild world of facts...

Where you can't just make shit up...

[JI7]

12. skinhead ?

is that what it says on his neck ?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

15. It appears so.

can the false associations be far behind?

[Trajan]

27. which false associations? ...

Care to elaborate?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

28. That anyone in favor of keeping sexual predator registry laws should be

saddled with the acts of a racist murderer.

[jeff47]

37. There aren't any sexual predator registry laws.

There are sexual registry laws. There's no requirement that the people on the registry be predators. That's just how the lists were marketed to the public.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

40. Fair enough but not what I was addressing.

[jeff47]

41. Yeah, it sucks when there are consequences to programs you support. (nt)

[Nuclear Unicorn]

42. I honestly have no idea what that means in context to what I was discussing.

[jeff47]

44. You were saying that people who support these lists

should not have to face the negative consequences of those laws. Such as the story at hand. Or the difficulty people on "the list" have getting employment. Or finding a place to live.

Because of a crime as horrific as being 18 and dating someone 17 and 364 days. Decades ago. Or public urination.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

47. If someone committed securities fraud I'm OK with them being banned for life

from securities trading even after their prison sentence and parole have been served. If that makes it hard for them to find employment elsewhere after the fact I'm OK with that too. Now, I wouldn't put someone who bounced a check on such a list but a misapplication of the law can be found in any circumstance. That doesn't invalidate any given law in and of itself it only indicates a need to refine the criteria for making such lists.

[jeff47]

48. It's not a misapplication of the law.

It is the law.

The fact that you don't understand what is actually in the law doesn't change what's in the law.

These lists were sold to the public as a way to protect themselves from serial rapists. But the lists were not limited to forcible rape and child molestation. An enormous number of sex acts that most people think is "no big deal" can get someone on these lists.

Btw, what does your analogy have to do with the subject at hand? Your example is someone who actually broke the laws regarding their profession.

That isn't the case with the sex offender registries. Those folks have a hard time finding work in any profession, because decades ago her parents didn't like him. And they got put on the list a couple decades after their sentence was complete.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

49. I understand that it is good and proper to prosecute -- for example --

someone who deliberately exposes himself to children out of his own twisted sexual gratification. But I also understand a man peeing on the side of the road has no such intentions. The former instance would be a good use of sex crime laws, the latter would be a misapplication. I see no reason to undo laws against exposing one's self to children but I'll jump on any bandwagon that wants to champion the poor sod who couldn't make it to a proper bathroom in time.

[jeff47]

50. Again, it's not a misapplication of the law. It is the law.

The fact that you disagree with the law doesn't make it a misapplication.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

52. The law is perfectly capable of ajudicating intent.

If laws need reform then so be it, but laws against sexual predators are good and proper and if sexual predators have to carry the stigma then so be it.

Do you want sexual predator laws stricken or reformed?

[jeff47]

55. The sexual predator laws are fine. It's the "list" laws that need to be thrown out.

The recidivism rate of people convicted for "sex crimes" is incredibly small. Thus even if the lists were limited to "sexual predators", they still wouldn't accomplish their goal.

There's also the little problem of applying a punishment, without trial, long after the sentence is complete.

[elehhhhna]

45. helluva point

[NutmegYankee]

14. Is anyone really surprised? Honestly?

That was always a possibility when posting these lists online.

[Incitatus]

18. The only thing that surprises me is that something like this didn't happen sooner. nt

[Blue_Tires]

30. You will remember

The insane nutbar back in the 90s who essentially compiled the names, home and work addresses, etc. of every abortion-providing doctor in every state. And yes, sadly, some of the doctors on that list met unfortunate ends...

The guy made national news at the time, since the "abortion wars" were still going strong...I remember his site well because I had to periodically check it to make sure a couple of relatives weren't ever put on it...

[NuclearDem]

20. The registry has to be fundamentally changed, if not completely abolished

It does nothing to protect anyone, the community or the registrant. There's such a cultural misunderstanding about sex crimes and the registry that it actually becomes counterproductive to even have the registry in the first place. Since an offender's place of work has to be listed, most employers won't hire a sex offender, which simply drives that person to commit burglaries, thefts, property crimes, or drug dealing to get any sort of money, and combined with the fact a lot of housing communities won't allow registered offenders to live in their areas, a lot become homeless.

If sex crimes were more prevalent or there was more of a risk for someone on the registry to reoffend, the registry would make some sense. However, the recidivism rate for sex offenders is astronomically low. Here in Indiana, about 12% of registered offenders commit another crime, and only 2% of that 12% commit another sex crime (and since "failure to register" is for some reason counted as a sex crime, that means actually crimes with a victim attached are virtually nonexistent).

The registry is completely useless. It has to go.

[davidpdx]

21. Part of the problem with the lists being public is you have people like this

Who decide to use the list for target practice. If they hadn't caught him, how many more people was he ready to kill?

[Robb]

24. Interestingly, this is the problem with guns being available, too.

Consider all the law-abiding people who used the list for purposes other than killing someone. That would be pretty much everyone else.

...Shall we ban the publication of these lists because of one or two people who will ignore the law anyhow?

[davidpdx]

68. Yes, guns are the issue as well

The problem with the list is balancing those few who will break the law against the people who use the information for non-destructive reasons (and by that I mean to keep their families safe by legal means). There pretty much is no way to balance the needs of the public and those on the list. The person who did shoot the guy on the list will be treated like a hero by most. I strongly believe people should be given a second chance when they have done their time. When people harass, threaten and kill people for things they have done in the past people aren't being given a chance to redeem themselves (imagine if we had to do that for something we've done wrong in our lives, what a treat that would be). Guns aren't the only way to threaten those on the lists, they just happen to be the worst way.

[Liberal_in_LA]

23. omg

[dballance]

26. Shades of Steve Martin in The Jerk

A whack job picks him out of the phone book at random as a target.


This was back when people had land lines listed in the white pages.

[malokvale77]

31. I have to pay $6 a month to not be listed in those white pages.

I have to keep one of those quaint land lines for a disabled member of my household.

[Blue_Tires]

32. I love that part, too...It was so ahead of its time

and it was a very, "only in America" -type of gag...

[Initech]

46. I was thinking more shades of Dexter.

[Warpy]

29. Watch him try to pull a variation of SYG as his defense

Still, this is a clear example of Murder 1. Unless the guy he murdered was black, this lunatic is going to have a very long life in prison.

[X_Digger]

33. By every measure and multiple studies, sex offenders have the *smallest* recidivism rate

These lists are so much panic mongering.

Much like 'stranger danger' and the whole 'amber alert' crap. Non-custodial child abductions are vanishingly rare, and the rate is dropping.

[Logical]

60. My next door neighbor could have killed someone and is not....

On a registry. Or a 5 time DUI driver. Makes no sense.

[Mariana]

64. A lot of people hear the term "sex offender"

and automatically assume it means "child rapist".

And isn't it weird that we have lists for "sex offenders" (who may not have committed any actual act of violence), but not for murderers, or armed robbers, or batterers, or various other types of violent criminals.

[X_Digger]

66. Don't give them any ideas ("lists" for other crimes)

Scarlet 'S' for sex offenders, scarlet 'T' for thieves, scarlet 'M' for murderers?

*shiver* No thanks.

[KT2000]

35. happened here last year

I live in a rural area in the NW of Washington state. A guy killed two registered sex offenders and was on his way to kill a third when he was killed by deputies. One of the men was on the registry for having a relationship with a girl under 18 when he was a few years older than she was. That was many years ago and he was currently married with 2 children.

[bluedigger]

38. He just wanted to kill someone.

If there were no sex offender registry he would have just used another criteria to select his victim.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

61. x2

[BeyondGeography]

53. Smug asshole is proud of it, too

[On the Road]

62. I Turned a Tenant Down a Couple of Weeks Ago

because his name turned up on a sex offender registry. It wasn't because I judgfed him to be a predator, but because it was a shared house, and a clean police record is really needed.

Had a tenant about five years ago who was on the list. Apparently he was 23 or 24 and had a 17yo girlfriend whose parents objected.

The only other sex offender I have met was a junkie -- kind of a sad guy. He might have been a creep, although he was pretty weak and harmless when I met him.

Personally, I don't draw any conclusions about someone just becase their name is on the sex offender registry. The list is just too full of people who didn't really commit a sex crime. It is what happens with any law than comes to be used routinely for purposes beyond its original intent.