ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

National

KS: Kansas bill would reveal names of juvenile sex offenders

[kake.com]

TOPEKA, Kan. (KAKE) – The family of a Newton mother and daughter who were killed last year is pushing for a new law that would reveal the names of child sex offenders.

Keith Hawkins was sentenced this month to life without the possibility of parole for the deaths of 24-year-old Alyssa Runyon and 4-year-old Zaylynn Paz. In a letter to Runyon’s family, Hawkins said he harmed the child first.

When Hawkins was 12 years old, he was convicted of indecent liberties with a 5-year-old girl. But because he was a juvenile when he committed the crime, a judge sealed Hawkins’ record.

A criminal complaint dated June 22, 2017, alleges Hawkins failed to register as a sex offender within three days of coming to Harvey County.

“My daughter and granddaughter were murdered because they had no idea about this guy,” Alyssa’s father, Edward Runyon, said.

Read more

 

Join the discussion

  1. counting the days

    I wish there was an ignorance registry, so I could identify and avoid idiots that push these idiotic bills. Of course these days, that would mean avoiding most of the U.S. population!

  2. The Unforgiven

    This is a great idea! If we throw 1000 juveniles under the bus to “save one child”, a good deed has been done.

  3. AJ

    One more step towards critical mass, resulting in implosion of the registry schemes as we know them. The more the merrier, because once everyone knows someone on the registry, it will become either useless or ignored. I can see this coming from an employer’s mouth someday: “I see you’re on ML. I have a cousin who’s on there, for something done years ago. So stupid.”

  4. Not in Kansas anymore Toto

    Are they saying that the victims would not have befriended this individual had they done their homework online about his history with a childhood entry in the registry and associated case history if it was public information or once he was an adult it should’ve gone public and thus they would’ve known? Is that known for sure they wouldn’t have or just good emotional publicity to get the law named after them like Megan’s law?

    What the heck! Put’em out there, let’s see which politician, Atty, LEO, public official has a child on it for the entire world to see.

  5. AlexO

    I’m curious if defense, or anyone, asked this father if he’s ever actually did a background check on anyone entering his home or close to his family? If he actually actively does do this, then, at least for him, such a bill has merit. But if this is nothing more than a pure emotional thing (which I can’t blame him for), then the bill would’ve been 100% useless were it already law.

  6. Q

    So; let me get this straight, they wish to punish every under 18yo person on their list because of a one off crime by a under 18yo who was on their list? I thought their list was supposed to prevent these kinds of crimes. I guess it hasn’t registered on these people who love their list that not everybody looks at their list. And I wonder how exposing all these underage kids to who knows what is going to prevent anything.

  7. Clarifying info on KS proposed law

    Proposed bill could change sex offender registry law

    http://www.kwch.com/content/news/Bill-would-require-juvenile-violent-sex-offenders-ti-register-with-state–475511223.html

    “The bill would require juvenile offenders convicted of violent acts to register on the public registry.”

    Key words – convicted of violent acts

    This changes the entire scope of the discussion.

    • David Kennerly, The Government-Driven Life

      Does it? Do we know what they mean by “violent?” Do most people know what “sexual violence” means? No, they don’t.

      • It could

        When it comes to two teens sexting consenually and KS wants to put them on the registry, yes, it does. The original article doesn’t clarify and leaves it open.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • 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.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • 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.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
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.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.