CONCORD — After enduring years of sexual and physical abuse as a child, a New Hampshire woman moved out of state and far away from those traumatic events. But then she heard her perpetrator was trying to get off a sex offender list so he could get free housing.
The state hadn’t told her about that, and she said she began to feel victimized again. The experience prompted her to join a campaign Tuesday to bolster the rights of crime victims by amending New Hampshire’s constitution. The Associated Press does not usually identify alleged victims of sex crimes.
The woman joined Gov. Chris Sununu, lawmakers and police officers in supporting a push to get a constitutional amendment known as Marsy’s Law on the November ballot.
More and more laws passed for protection because of fear that a boogie man is out to stalk and attack someone as proof of recidivism, just exactly what Katherine Carpenter was talking about in the issues of SO registry laws getting passed.
I do believe a victims rights should be protected, I also believe an offenders rights should be protected. This man committed this offense 34 years ago; leave him out of this issue.
It’s unclear to me how this proposed State Constitutional Amendment would even affect this situation. According to the article, the proposed amendment relates to sentencing, release, and parole but says nothing about someone who is no longer under supervision.
Another politician trying to get a leg up using the fear of SEX OFFENDERS and what they will do next.
We are fighting against emotions, not logic. When viewed from this perspective, the motivation for all these paranoid, fear-fueled laws make sense.We are fighting against emotions, not logic. When viewed from this perspective, the motivation for all these paranoid, fear-fueled laws make sense.
“The state hadn’t told her about that, and she said she began to feel victimized again.” Because, you know, anything good which might happen to “the victimizer” is at the expense of “the victim.” Zero-sum game. Just like with “rights.” You know, “the criminals have more rights than the victims!” There’s only so many rights to go around and, if you’re no longer being tormented by the state, it is at the “victim’s” expense. Both victimizer and victim enjoy lifetime status and remunerations. Forever and ever.
Since we can no longer attack gays, Blacks, immigrants, Jews, women, the mentally ill, drug addicts or alcoholics the field is getting pretty slim. Everybody that wants to hate has to focus on the registered sex offender. They are about the only minority group left that is still fair game to revile, slander, hate and malign.
Odd dichotomy.
1. Someone gets off the registry, but the victim gets infuriated that after 34 years, she doesn’t get notified that he may have changed and so she wants to be informed before he gets a hearing to be off the registry to continue to be on the registry? And this isn’t punishment nor retributive?
2. A sex offender dies, either by way of accident (train) or on purpose (vigilante), but the status of the offender’s past is emblazoned all over the article when they were the victim. So the authors still want you to know that the dead victim is currently a predator. The author is demeaning the dead’s existence… as if the life wasn’t really worth caring about.
But the dichotomy exists because of one idea: Once a sex offender, always a sex offender… always a monster.
This was brought about by the SCOTUS and admittedly stating in Doe v Smith, 2003. These crimes have an 80% recidivism rate, which is “frightening and high”.
So much attention for the victim yet none of it identifies their most obvious deficit: that they need to get over it.
Lost in the hullabaloo is the reason the registrant was trying to get off the registry in the first place: Registrants are banned from getting housing vouchers based upon registry status. This was NOT about reducing the sentence or about any current stalking or harassment charges. The law will now effectively create more danger for the community because registrants will not be able to ever get security in their lives, even 34 years after the crime committed when they were young adults, while murderers get the same vouchers.
She feels Victimized because he is trying to get off the registry ? to find housing , alleged FREE housing ? and not because he is trying to find her or anything like that , yet he is simply trying to attain “Housing ” , she jumped on the band wagon or was led their by LE . the same LE with their one hand out and one hand in their pocket , putting on their best oh I care so much face . the same LE that works for the states that are offering treatment / victim grooming , that tells them how heathy it is to go through life punishing people they don’t like ! rather than real tools for being able to move on in their life , yet RC’s are being stalked / killed / targeted . and the state and federal gov’t even put the list of RC’s for the stalkers to abuse . and she feels victimized ? , and they are naming the law after someone that was killed in 83 ? in CA ? you know what I have to say about all this ? the laws are already slanted enough as it is , and I don’t see any new laws being named after RC’s that were murdered along with their family member or members , and the reason that is that its as plain as the nose on your face that (1) there is no money in that ,( 2) law makers are cowards , and (3) it points to the fact that the states/Feds are the leaders in the crimes against RC’s , by furnishing needed info to not only who the RC’s Are But how to find them , accessory before and after the fact , power run amuck
It doesn’t make any sense at all for this law to get passed because of a person feeling victimized because that ex offender is trying to get off the registry and trying to find a place to live and is not bothering anyone