OH: Supreme Court – When Is a Sex Offender Not a Sex Offender?

Maybe Hollywood culture has impassioned us too much. We expect loud murmurings and banging from a gavel to restore order when we envision courtroom scenes. Largely, we expect drama, especially when it comes to sex crimes. The reality is that it is a subdued affair. At least it was this morning. There was a small and quiet crowd in the Supreme Court of Ohio this morning. Overall, it was a feeling of intrigue as the Court heard an important paradox of a question.

When is a sex offender not a sex offender? Full Article

Oral Argument Video

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

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

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. 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.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. 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.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. 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.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

9 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Here’s the video link to yesterday’s Ohio Supreme Court oral arguments:
http://www.ohiochannel.org/UserContent/108407/146024.mp4

Well, it sounds like the Ohio justices do not agree with the U.S. justices!
Thanks for providing the video.

These are the kind of decisions that start to underpin the future re-examination of the registry as what it is, punitive. I love that no one mentioned Price Club!

“The State’s Attorney argued …. Automatic registration does not equate cruel and unusual punishment. However, the State’s Attorney, when pressed by the Court, agreed the laws can be restrictive and punitive.”

Wow! The State Attorney actually conceded this?! Great!

*fingers crossed for a favorable outcome that concedes the concept of registration as punishment*

If voted favorably in the case of the petitioner, this could set a precedent for a federal case. Please keep us updated on what the Ohio supreme court decides.

If you haven’t watched it yet, this is incredible. These justices really hand it to the AG, and lend a hand to the appellant’s attorney. Good vibes – the Chief Justice even throws SCOTUS under the bus.

The judges are asking all the right questions and registration SHOULD be on a case by case basis, specifically reserved for the SVP’s who can’t control themselves.
The fact that the CASOMB report has said that someone on the registry 17 years offense free has an equal chance of offending as joe citizen could be the basis for a similar suit.
Do we have an 8th amendment argument also? Shouldn’t every one be on the list then?

Love this video it gives me hope that there is actually some sane people in these justices. The constitution may yet prevail if more judges do their job and protect it from over zealous law makers out to destroy it for their own personal gain.