A convicted child predator, whose proposed home was destroyed in a suspicious fire, has been released and is living in motels in Fresno County.
Liberty, the contractor hired to supervise Snyder 24 hours a day, and the California Department of State Hospitals looked at 1,749 homes in Fresno County as possible residences for him. Full Article
I have a significant problem with this: “In a Facebook post, the Sheriff’s Office urged Squaw Valley residents to speak up to stop Snyder’s placement in their community.”
This is well beyond the mission and duty of the Sheriff’s Office. In fact, I wonder if it could perhaps be illegal political activity. It’s one thing for the Sheriff to put out a neutral statement saying this person is seeking, etc. It’s quite another to outright “urge” residents to act. If this is okay, what’s to stop the Sheriff from “urging” residents to start making life hard for other RCs already settled in the area?
This echoes the story last month of the gent in AZ where the sheriff’s deputy told the campground owner they should not be doing business with the RC, which is not in sheriff’s or his office’s line of business to do. I have to agree this is potential illegal political activity.
At minimum, it appears to violate the National Sheriffs’ Association’s Code of Ethics (https://www.sheriffs.org/sites/default/files/tb/NSACodeofEthics.pdf):
***”I shall ensure that I and my employees, in the performance of our duties, will enforce and administer the law according to the standards of the U.S. Constitution and applicable state constitutions and statutes so that equal protection of the law is guaranteed to everyone. To that end I shall not permit personal opinion, party affiliations, or consideration of the status of others to alter or lessen this standard of treatment of others.”
Hmm… Personal opinion? Consideration of the status of others? Altering or lessening the standard of treatment of others?
***”I shall not tolerate nor condone brutal or inhumane treatment of others by my employees nor shall I permit or condone inhumane or brutal treatment of inmates in my care and custody.”
Inhumane: “not humane; lacking humanity, kindness, compassion, etc.”
(http://www.dictionary.com/browse/inhumane, http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/inhumane)
You could apply that to almost any sheriff in Florida. Many have openly stated they purposely make it hard on rc’s so they will leave their county.
@AJ
How binding is that code? If the do that, what are the repercussions for the Sheriff and their office if found they committed a violation against the code? Can they be sued if found in violation after an ethics inquiry agrees they are guilty of a violation? Does the Sheriff have to openly state they agree to the code?
this is that happed when Singleton got out , they end up putting singleton in a trailer on some prison grounds tell he was off prole , its really a drag he went on to kill a women in Florida , these hi profile cases are really counter productive , its to bad that much more time would of been spent on helping him so not reoffend rather than the stupid prison time to punish , I just don’t see how punishment was cheaper or better than helping him so there would a much lesser chance of reoffending , not to mention the advancement in this kind of medicine as well as knowledge of helping people as a whole , punishment is not the answer for people that are sick , punishment stands in the way of positive future out come as well as real advancement in humane thinking rather than guilt sin blame punish cycle that go’s no where no one is truly helped including the “victim” or future “victims” , what about the “victim” that is inflicted with some kind of disorder that can be helped if only the door was open with out the whole shaming process and fear of prosecution even , the system we have now is a nightmare for everyone , I am just saying that many of the places that prisons and state hospitals are more geared to keeping people and not truly fixing anyone , and when it comes to citizens with issues dealing with sex “Crimes” even being in a state hospital there is an element of punishment that is in the way of treatment ,, shaming once people get out ,
Essentially, the public can ban him from living in their area.
If you call that living.
“But none of the homes were deemed suitable for Snyder, a sexually violent predator convicted seven times of molesting children, the district attorney’s office said in a statement.”
Was this seven counts or seven separate convictions? If he’s being let out into the community, I’m thinking its the former. If it’s the latter, this person has severe issues and I don’t know if he’d fair well on the outside.
Still, these restrictions and allowing public opinion on who lives where, is pretty bad in general. The public should have as little say as possible. People are dumb, panicky animals.
I saw this very soon after it was posted here. After a number of hours I have come up with one question.
Where did the author of the story come up with the idea that the authorities were searching for a home for this guy? The California department of state hospitals isn’t law enforcement and neither is the healthcare company hired to watch the man 24/7. If anything the authorities were waging a campaign against this guy finding a suitable residence. The sheriff’s office and district attorney wanted the public to get a court to deny the man a home and it worked.
This only goes to show why there cant be a registry tiered or otherwise! You cant villanize people as this and expect that the public will be accepting. I wouldn’t feel comfortable knowing that he is around. And without the registry, as it’s always been since the beginning of time. People just dont learn of these dirty little secrets, and life goes on. And yes occasionally a child does have a bad experience that most will get over.
There was no epidemic in sex crimes when registries happened: Only a series of headline cases here folks wondered how such things could happen. Well if one examines the reasons, generally you’ll find that the “system” failed. They let people who had a bad history run free. Those were the people law enforcement should have been looking after had they been doing their job– a law enforcement only registry everyone would have agreed is a good idea.
But this story illustrates the collision of good intentions paired with greedy power hungry people of power and responsibility: AKA politicians, judges, Prosecutors, etc. they are the ones charged to solve our problems, but it is they who failed.
Well blame isn’t the issue here– No need for a registry and law enforcement and legislators doing their jobs are the issues here