ENGLEWOOD – The City of Englewood announced on Tuesday that they plan to appeal the recent federal court decision to allow sexual offenders to be housed near schools, parks, pools and daycare centers.
What started the court decision was when a registered sex offender fought the law and won after being told he couldn’t live anywhere in the City of Englewood.
The ruling has potential to undermine laws in five other Colorado cities that place distance restrictions on how close some sex offenders can live to certain locations. Full Article
That’s the same situation as one of the Orange County cities we live in!! 25+ years ago and still today being told where you can and cannot live! Unbelievable!
If these hypocrites really want to protect kids why are they not screaming bloody murder about drug users and drug dealers? Or murderers gang members? I think these two groups pose the greatest risk to youth and their families. If any group or groups need to be kept away from kids it’s these two groups. With a recidivism rate of under 2% I think RSO’s pose the least risk to kids. The city of Englewood is only putting their ignorance (and ignorance is a choice) of the facts/truth out there for all to see and perpetuating the lie that people that have had a “sex” offense are dangerous.
The federal court decision on restrictions where to live (yes grandpa we’re talking about the USA) (in a capitalist state…your money tells where to live…in a communist type
of state..the state tells you)…………….its a major victory for our Constitution ….this man made group and thanks to the ACLU and its founder Helen Keller all the while blind fighting against injustice…..thank you.
Englewood…c’mon man………are we NOT communists…??? we live in a capitalist society….NOT a communist one for you to power over people…………..anyways the federal court decision puts englewoood city in check……soon….can you hear it ………Booya….Checkmate.
Actually, I am glad that Englewood is appealing. This gives our side the advantage of both being able to present the facts, as well as being the defendant (which is the preferred tactical position for an appellate defense). In addition, even if the decision goes against us, this provides another decision that will add to the need to get cert acceptance at the US Supreme Court later on that could rule the restrictions unconstitutional throughout the entire country.
My only lament is that Janice is not on the litigation team. Hopefully she will be able to provide a brief, though.