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
-
OK: Advocates for Registrants (including ACSOL) Testify in Support of Changes to Oklahoma Registry
Source: ACSOL Three leading advocates for registrants testified this week before a legislative committee in Oklahoma... -
Federal court rules registration is not punishment
A federal district court in Idaho issued a decision recently in which it agreed with the... -
CA: California Law Helps Former Prison Firefighters Get Fire Department Jobs
Source: goodnewsinstead.com For many people in California’s prisons, fighting wildfires offers more than a chance to...
$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……”