OH: Lawmakers consider changing penalties for sex offenders

Source: journal-news.com 11/16/22

A bill to modify the state’s law on people charged civilly, but not criminally, with child sexual abuse had its first hearing Tuesday in the House Criminal Justice Committee.

House Bill 689 would double the statute of limitations, from two years to four, for prosecuting a mandatory reporter who failed to report child abuse, said the bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati. That is the longest period for any misdemeanor offense, he said.

For cases in which the statute of limitations for prosecuting sex offenders has expired, legislation in 2006 established a civil-judgment process that allowed accused offenders to be put on a civil sex offender registry at any time, separate from the registry for those who were criminally convicted, Seitz said.

Read the full article


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. 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.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. 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.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest article we will not approve your comment.
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.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

So keeping this in mind of double the statute of limitations for a mandatory reporter do you think that some may just accuse/report someone who may be totally innocent just to cover their own butts so nothing comes back and slaps them in the face for non-reporting. “So what if I am wrong” they would say to themselves “as long as I am not charged personally for non-reporting“.

(That law established a criminal penalty for not complying with the registry, but courts said a criminal penalty couldn’t be attached to a civil offense, he said. So HB 689 makes noncompliance with registering a civil violation, punishable by a fine up to $2,500.)

Wait a minute, so they have a civil sex offender registry and a criminal sex offender registry? But everyone with the sex offender registry has said, the sex offender registry is is civil scheme. Not criminal! This year would prove that they cannot attach a criminal penalty to a civil scheme. I think the more and more they keep on making this thing bigger and bigger, they are going to expose it as a punishment. And hopefully the courts will agree.

Another ” path of least resistance ” attack on free speech.
Unlike convicted persons, mandatory “reporters” under color of law haven’t factually signed a standard waiver of civil rights. However a group of professionals could decide by or thru convention to report but this activity isn’t a statute its best practices. Free speech & morality are intrinsically linked. See Packingham. Iwasf we already know people get wrongfully convicted with false assumptions why demand a mandatory information statute with criminal liability. IMO AMERICA HAS TO MANY KARENS ALREADY.

Soon there will be a separate registry for hypothetical sex offenses. Or maybe even unintentional sex offenses. Anyway they can get away with it they will try.