VA: woman convicted for harassing sex offender

All she wanted to do, Delores Ann Harris told a jury Friday, was to protect herself and her granddaughter from a man who had been convicted 21 years ago of aggravated sexual battery, a man who has been on the state’s sex offender registry since 1997.

But the convicted sex offender in the courtroom was the victim in the jury trial. And Harris, 61, was the defendant, charged with misusing information from the sex offender registry. Full Article

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.  
 

13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

+1 for our side.

I sent this in an email to ken and John. I think they need this (and I hope Janice follows through when the do their next show, like they did in Carson a couple of years ago and recently in Lancaster, harassing RCs) to happen to them.

Others should send it to them too or post it on their FB page. mentioning that CA has the same laws.

This is a very good article. I’m a little surprised that the law enforcement officers who work in the jurisdiction where the man is posting signs on his car ect/in front of his neighbors home isn’t being arrested as well. As such, we have so many people who have paid their debt to society, moved on with their lives and yet people continue to hound them like it just happened yesterday. I can recall the news crew interviewing the neighbor (the man parking his car on front of his neighbors home with a sign). The man would look down and almost not face the camera. Yet, he acted like a professional and stated, “I believe these people can’t change!” Based upon? Ignorant

Lol at the comments on that page. Some people get it…some dont. So much misinformation.

Let me say this in the kindest manner. If people are allowed to harass or create havoc for registered citizens like this, one of two things will occur. The person being harassed could potentially lose it and potentially commit another crime/against the person harassing them. Or, the person being harassed could be potentially harmed by a vigilante or some person who thinks they know what’s beat! I would also be lead to believe that whatever took place could be devastating. Again, if these so called law makers continue to create havoc for those of us who have gotten on with their lives, something or someone is going to loose it! Don’t wait until then to re-address these laws like Nevada ect. I’ve never once heard of a recently released murderer or reputed gang member having to go through some guy convicted of a minor sex offense years ago! Wake up America!

Harris stated that “her only concern was the safety of herself and her granddaughter”
How does concern turn into harassment of another human being? And why isn’t she thrown into the slammer for a few months?

This is exactly what happens when fear mongering and hate mongering enables weak minded individuals – who apparently see no connection to the constitution – to take the bait and believe that the harassment of registrants is a good idea.

I’m surprised that justice prevailed – or at least in this case – in Virginia as the states in those regions have the most vile and hateful policies toward registrants. The chaos trickles down to the average folks who mistakenly believe that the lawmakers knew what they were doing when they enacted these “laws” – and that’s using the term loosely.

Hopefully, this can set a precedent, albeit among few examples, of the other side of the statutes as it pertains to harming registrants.