A judge has awarded $160,000 to a Bayou Blue man who said he was labeled a child sexual predator via a series of emails and flyers sent out by Houma Police.
Related posts
-
IL: Guard at sexual offender treatment facility sentenced for child pornography dissemination
Source: myjournalcourier.com 11/19/25 RUSHVILLE — A former security guard and therapy aide at a center for... -
Smarter Federal Supervision: Cut Costs And Improve Fairness
Source: forbes.com 11/11/25 A Growing Focus on Post-Prison Supervision In recent discussions on criminal justice reform,... -
FL: Former Miami-Dade cop dead of apparent suicide days before child pornography sentencing
Source: nbcmiami.com 11/18/25 Former Miami-Dade Police Sgt. James ____ died by apparent suicide in the Federal...
$160k – that’s it? Before legal costs? No thank you, I would like to keep my good name.
You’re right, Joe. No amount of money will make up for the loss of one’s reputation, and the fear that goes along with being targeted like this.
So let me get this straight in my head, you posted this as a good thing or a bad thing? What it tells me is the damages associated with (wrongfully) accused of being a sex offender is worth a $160K. Thats alot of money to distance yourself from SO status.. In the “eyes of the court and the eyes of the public” it indicates that having attained Sex offender Status is is so damaging to one’s reputation that a person needs to seek monetary remedy by the judicial. The fact this person “won” his judgement also leads me to believe that many offenders who “claim innocense” or insist they were overly prosecuted and recieved “SO” status regardless, may not be so “over-prosecuted” after all??
What this judgement says to me is that at least one court recognized that being labeled a “sexual predator” is in itself harmful. Terms like this one are being used loosely to refer to anyone on the registry when many have been convicted of a non-contact, non-violent offense. If it takes a court award of $160,000 to help educate the public, then I am in favor of it.
Yes, you’re right, Janice. This judgement is one baby step in the right direction, and may help others in the future avoid being labeled. As such, the decision is good, and I’m in favor of it as well. Still, I agree with Joe–once labeled, the damage is done, and it’s hard to move forward, no matter how many courts think the label was wrong to begin with. But, I guess we have to accept the “wins” where we can, no matter how small, and keep going. “With malice for none…….with charity for all……….let us strive on to finish the work we are in……”