IN: Bill that prevents sex offenders from living near victims signed by governor

INDIANAPOLIS – A bill authored by State Sen. Mike Bohacek, R-Michiana Shores, that prevents sex offenders from living near victims was ceremonially signed into law Monday by Gov. Eric Holcomb.

Senate Enrolled Act 12 makes it unlawful for a sex offender to intentionally establish residence within one mile of their victim. Although this is current law for victims who are minors, SEA 12 extends the protection to all victims regardless of age. 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.  
 

12 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“The home should be a safe place,” Bohacek said. “It should be a place where we can let our guard down, and feel safe without any threats or fears.”

Oh, the irony of that sentiment seeing how that doesn’t apply us.

And so the cancer started in OK over BS hysteria has spread… Looks like this is going to be the new “it” RC law to pass.

So let’s see, a RC cannot live near the victim or be arrested. Yet if the RC keeps track of the victim to avoid living too close, they risk cyberstalking…and being arrested. Never mind that the victim can up and move at any time. In short, where a RC is *allowed* to live is contingent on where someone else *chooses* to live. Ahhh, the land of the free…

“…if they knowingly reside within a one-mile radius of their victim without permission of the sentencing court…”.

How are they supposed to “knowingly” know where the victim lives? And what happens if they didn’t know?

“In this case, the offender would be committing an invasion of privacy…”

Invasion of privacy from a mile away? LOL, like everyone knows/sees/meets everyone in a mile radius of their home.

“…93 percent of juvenile victims knew the perpetrator”.

So why have a registry and all that comes with it?

This law (people) is so ignorant.

Yet again…

There shouldn’t be a single law written that pertains to protecting the public that is not a part of the original trial and determined by a judge during the sentencing portion of the trial. Period.

It is the judiciary’s responsibility, as determined by laws created by the legislature themselves (18 U.S. Code § 3553 – Imposition of a sentence), to determine everything regarding the sentence:
*****
(a)Factors To Be Considered in Imposing a Sentence.—The court shall impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with the purposes set forth in paragraph (2) of this subsection. The court, in determining the particular sentence to be imposed, shall consider—
(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant;
(2) the need for the sentence imposed—
(A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense;
(B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct;
(C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and
(D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner
*****

Legislatures’ are violating Separation of Powers from the very rules they wrote to ensure fair treatment of US citizens in giving us due process and protections from arbitrary government action.

Somehow, a case somewhere needs to get to SCOTUS so they can finally stand up for the judiciary and quit allowing legislature to bypass it whenever the fear mongering politicians need to increase their vote counts. To do otherwise, means it is only a matter of time before every state, city, and even home owner associations and apartments are allowed to add restrictions to those ever convicted or that even plead guilty/no contest to any crime.

For instance, imagine if a city made it illegal for anyone ever convicted or plead guilty to driving drunk to drive a car in their city? A driver that ever had that on their record would have to research every city they ever drive through, every time they drive through it just in case the law changed that day. It sounds crazy, but that is exactly what every sex offender has to do and “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander”.

“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.” – Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)

Another law making it more likely that abuse within the family will not be reported.

People who support this “law” are nothing but criminals. They are not Americans. They are war criminals that deserve to be dealt with.

Again, we see that the criminals very easily could have made their “law” apply to anyone who has ever committed any serious crime. But since the “law” actually has nothing at all to do with public safety or protecting children, they just ignore that part. I have a theory that they might exclude truly dangerous people because those people would hopefully murder them.

We don’t need criminals like Mike Bohacek, Eric Holcomb, etc. in America.

I’d be curious, out of the fun of it all, to know how this would relate to sting operations. You can’t live by the set-up house, meeting place…or you can’t live by the officer who was posing as a minor? What about Catch a Predator? Now you can’t live by the Perverted Justice contact as well as the officer(s) who kept investigating?

So, what about Romeo and Juliet cases where they later get married? The need the court’s permission to be a family now?