CO: Man punished as sex offender, but was never charged with sex assault

____ ____ was sent to prison twice for parole violations related to being a sex offender even though he has never been convicted of a sex offense and the woman who originally accused him of rape recanted.

____ is one of about 800 convicts in Colorado who have been “administratively” classified as a sex offender and must abide by stringent rules when paroled as though they were convicted of rape or child molestation. Full Article

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I predicted this only a few years ago….

I’m not the only one who saw this coming either.

My advocacy for reform of sex offender laws began not just because i was placed on the registry, but also because i knew it more political than it was about safety.

Colorado is just plain wrong and can’t seem to find the honesty and integrity to admit when they screwed up; 800 times!. If this article shows me anything about that state it is that it’s like California insofar as proving by their actions and logic, (if you can call it that) as well as results that their registry and all associated laws have nothing to do with public safety or saving “just one child.” I’m not really sure what it’s all about over there, but it’s obviously not about law, justice, honesty or integrity; I think that’s pretty obvious!!!! It’s pretty clear they have allot of problems they need to straighten out.

Sorry to be the ones to tell you this, but California does this too. While on parole, I knew two different individuals who were never convicted of a sex crime yet on parole like one, as well as several whose “sex crimes” were misdemeanors and one even who never had a felony conviction in his life but found himself in prison and then on parole for probation violations for misdemeanors.

Yes, California does this as well. I know someone very well who was not convicted of crimes that mandate registration, yet was sentenced by the judge to register anyway, basically just so the judge could cover himself. This judge stated, “I don’t believe your story, so I’m going to sentence you to register.” That was in 2008. Since then, a similar case has worked it’s way up to the CA Supreme Court. Keep your eye on People v. Moseley. It has been at the Supreme Court for 2 years now awaiting the scheduling of oral arguments. I think it is a good sign that the court didn’t simply dismiss it. My friend also has filed a writ on the same grounds, and it has been found to have merit as well and is working its way up. His lawyer is charging a very low fee because she wants to be at the forefront of this. She feels he will prevail, but it will take some time. He is currently on a 5 year probation with ankle monitor for forgetting to register on time. These cases argue that the registry is additional punishment, especially since the passage of AB 109, which is a violation of rights based on Cunningham, Blakely, etc. The climate is changing, albeit too slowly. If the court rules in favor of Moseley I think things will change.