Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Molester exempt from sex offender registry
The Washington Times ^ | 10-27-05 | Metro

Posted on 10/27/2005 11:14:47 AM PDT by JZelle

GALENA, Md. (AP) -- A Kent County man convicted of molesting two Boy Scouts in the 1980s will not have to register as a sex offender after serving a prison sentence because the crime was long ago, a judge has ruled. James Carl Combs, now 41 and living in Galena, was an assistant scoutmaster in Cecilton in the early 1980s, when he molested two boys, ages 12 and 14, a jury decided in August. The charges came about after one of the victims, now in his 30s, recalled the sexual abuse during a psychotherapy session in November, said Detective 1st Class Adam Streight with the Cecil County Sheriff's Office. The therapist followed state law in notifying police about the sex abuse, and Combs was convicted of a second-degree sex offense and five counts of sexual child abuse. At Combs' sentencing Monday, prosecutors asked for six years in prison, with Combs registering as a sex offender after his release.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; meganslaw; pedophile; sexoffender
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

1 posted on 10/27/2005 11:14:50 AM PDT by JZelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JZelle

Washington, the new Florida.


2 posted on 10/27/2005 11:16:05 AM PDT by xmm0 (This post has been brought to you by the letters "U," "S," and "A" and Amendment number 1.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JZelle
HUH?

" ... A Kent County man convicted of molesting two Boy Scouts in the 1980s will not have to register as a sex offender after serving a prison sentence because the crime was long ago ..."

So long ago?

What does THAT have to do with registering?
3 posted on 10/27/2005 11:16:26 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xmm0

Err, Maryland. thats what I get from thinking looking at "Washington Times"..


4 posted on 10/27/2005 11:17:04 AM PDT by xmm0 (This post has been brought to you by the letters "U," "S," and "A" and Amendment number 1.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xmm0

This is in Maryland, not Washington.


5 posted on 10/27/2005 11:18:02 AM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nmh
Is there a statute of limitation on rape?
6 posted on 10/27/2005 11:18:23 AM PDT by dhs12345 (w)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nmh
What does THAT have to do with registering?

It's called the Bill of Rights. Ex Post Facto. You can't pass a law and then apply it retroactively.

7 posted on 10/27/2005 11:19:04 AM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp

But he was sentenced Monday.


8 posted on 10/27/2005 11:20:32 AM PDT by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nmh

What does THAT have to do with registering?
______________________________________________

Possibly the ex-post facto prohibition in the US Constitution? If you are convicted of a crime that did not have a certain sanction attached to it, then you can not usually be sanctioned by more than what the law called for at the time you committed the act.


9 posted on 10/27/2005 11:21:23 AM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nmh
What does THAT have to do with registering?
If I'm not mistaken, you have to be tried according to the laws in place at the time the crime was committed. If registration wasn't required then, it would be considered an "ex post facto" law to require it now...and that's banned by the Constitution.

-Eric

10 posted on 10/27/2005 11:21:52 AM PDT by E Rocc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JZelle
According to Detective Streight, Combs had been serving as a 4-H leader before the grand jury indicted him. Combs stopped volunteering with the organization after being charged.

Still trolling for victims?

11 posted on 10/27/2005 11:24:18 AM PDT by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E Rocc

Does that mean if somebody in 1978 commits a capital crime, but is caught in 2005 in a place where capital punishment is suspended, they can still be punished by the 1978 guidelines?


12 posted on 10/27/2005 11:25:11 AM PDT by Eepsy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: E Rocc

"State sentencing guidelines call for four to nine years in prison for the offenses.
Instead, Cecil County Circuit Court Judge O. Robert Lidums gave Combs a three-month term at the county jail and three months of house arrest."

Seems the judge only follows the rules he likes.


13 posted on 10/27/2005 11:25:44 AM PDT by ButThreeLeftsDo (Carry Daily. Apply Sparingly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EdReform; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; stage left; Yakboy; I_Love_My_Husband; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping.

Why do they let these psychopaths off the hook?

The townsfolk should protest the courts. Make public his ID and address.

They need to plaster the pervs mugs on every bulletin board and telephone pole in the state.

If you want on/off the ping list let me and little jeremiah know.

14 posted on 10/27/2005 11:29:23 AM PDT by DirtyHarryY2K (http://soapboxharry.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JZelle
"The charges came about after one of the victims, now in his 30s, recalled the sexual abuse during a psychotherapy session in November, said Detective 1st Class Adam Streight with the Cecil County Sheriff's Office."

Someone still believes in recovered memories? I thought this was shown to be a sham years ago.
15 posted on 10/27/2005 11:30:20 AM PDT by Moral Hazard ("Now therefore kill every male among the little ones" - Numbers 31:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ButThreeLeftsDo
Seems the judge only follows the rules he likes.

Sounds like the judge has the same concerns about 'recovered memory' junk science that I do.

16 posted on 10/27/2005 11:34:20 AM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nmh
***So long ago? What does THAT have to do with registering?***

Probably (likely) ex post facto. That is unconstitutional and would be argued during the appeal.

I'm betting that per state law that since the crimes were committed in the '80's he's subject to the laws in effect at the time - even though he was just convicted.

That being said this 'recovered memory stuff' is troubling. Much of it is horse poop. The so-called memories are created by the therapist.

17 posted on 10/27/2005 11:34:32 AM PDT by Condor51 (Leftists are moral and intellectual parasites - Standing Wolf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Quilla

It's not when sentencing occurs, it's when the crime occurs.

If they make 10-gauge shotguns illegal, and I owned one 20 years ago, I can't go to jail for once owning a 10-gauge shotgun. You can't pass a law and apply it retroactively.

Let's try another example. You go through a "Yield" sign at 4th and Main, obeying the traffic laws. Neighbors don't like the law at that intersection, so they petition to have it replaced with a "Stop" sign. You cannot then be given a ticket for having gone through the "Yield" sign several months prior to the installation of the "Stop" sign.


18 posted on 10/27/2005 11:36:18 AM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Condor51

A twelve or fourteen year old who cannot remember sexual abuse until he is in his thirties...and in therapy no less?


19 posted on 10/27/2005 11:42:22 AM PDT by Conservababe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Eepsy
Does that mean if somebody in 1978 commits a capital crime, but is caught in 2005 in a place where capital punishment is suspended, they can still be punished by the 1978 guidelines?
I'm not sure about that one. But if you are convicted of a murder committed before a state imposed capital punishment, you can't be executed for it.

It seemed to me that there was a major gap in the plot of John Grisham's The Chamber, an otherwise excellent book. The protagonist's grandfather was convicted of a murder committed during the 1960s and sentenced to death. But all state death penalty laws were overturned by the USSC in 1972. It would appear that he couldn't have been sentenced to death, since the state law at the time was ruled unconstitutional.

-Eric

20 posted on 10/27/2005 11:45:51 AM PDT by E Rocc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Conservababe
A twelve or fourteen year old who cannot remember sexual abuse until he is in his thirties...and in therapy no less?

That raises a red flag, doesn't it?

21 posted on 10/27/2005 11:48:08 AM PDT by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp

I appreciate the explanation. Although it makes perfect sense now, it seems a shame that families will not be warned about this animal.


22 posted on 10/27/2005 11:52:03 AM PDT by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JZelle

When I saw the words "sex offender" I thought this was about BJ Clinton.


23 posted on 10/27/2005 11:57:23 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Logophile

I remember the witch hunts of the eighties. I can't recall the names, but daycare and church workers were convicted of horrendous and impossible sexual abuse.


24 posted on 10/27/2005 11:57:25 AM PDT by Conservababe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
If they make 10-gauge shotguns illegal, and I owned one 20 years ago, I can't go to jail for once owning a 10-gauge shotgun. You can't pass a law and apply it retroactively.

By your reasoning, every gun ban passed is illegal ex post facto law, and therefore unconstitutional. The 2nd Amendment also prohibits such actions, but look where we are today!

The "assault weapons" bans are a prime example.

25 posted on 10/27/2005 11:58:49 AM PDT by Disambiguator (Making accusations of racism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: E Rocc
It would appear that he couldn't have been sentenced to death, since the state law at the time was ruled unconstitutional.

Another good example would be Charles Manson and "family". They were all sentenced to death (I think all of them were, anyways). Then the death penalty was ruled unconstitutional, and their sentences were commuted to life sentences. The death penalty was then found to be constitutional after all, but their death sentences were not reinstated. Manson could conceivably get out on parole. (NEVER happen, but it is theoretically possible).

26 posted on 10/27/2005 12:03:03 PM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dhs12345
Is there a statute of limitation on rape?

Nope. It looks to me like he was convicted, but the judge said he doesn't have to register.

27 posted on 10/27/2005 12:06:41 PM PDT by BostonianRightist (I looted New Orleans and all I got was 40 of these lousy taglines.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Moral Hazard

If this guy had a decent attorney, the charges would have been dropped, or he would have likely won at trial. regardless of what would have happened at trial, an appeal of a conviction would be reversed for sure on appeal.


28 posted on 10/27/2005 12:07:59 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JZelle
The charges came about after one of the victims, now in his 30s, recalled the sexual abuse during a psychotherapy session in November...

Oh, yes. Repressed memories. I'm going to get something on my parents one of these days.
29 posted on 10/27/2005 12:08:32 PM PDT by BikerNYC (Modernman should not have been banned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator
The "assault weapons" bans are a prime example.

They are a prime example. There were "pre-ban" and "post-ban" guns. I had purchased a mini-14 before the ban. The ban did not apply to my gun. I put a folding stock on it, flash suppressor, high-capacity magazines, etc: some of my alterations were done after the "ban" was in effect. The ban on "assualt weapons" did not apply to my gun because it was exempt due to the constitutional ban on Ex Post Facto laws.

30 posted on 10/27/2005 12:09:29 PM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ButThreeLeftsDo

The sentence reflects the judge's confidence in the prosecution and the evidence.


31 posted on 10/27/2005 12:09:45 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp

The Federal ban, maybe, but not in California and New Yawk.


32 posted on 10/27/2005 12:26:37 PM PDT by Disambiguator (Making accusations of racism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator

What I don't understand is why nobody is challenging the California and New York laws. The states do not have the right to violate the US constitution. What is happening in some states (and DC) in regards to the right to keep and bear arms is an obscenity.

What we really need is to overturn the federal firearms act of 1934. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS wont even hear such cases. In their arrogance and lust for power, they have consistently refused.


33 posted on 10/27/2005 12:36:20 PM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: BikerNYC

There were two victims.


34 posted on 10/27/2005 1:12:16 PM PDT by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: DirtyHarryY2K; deaconjim

Makes you wonder how many other sex offenders are out there running free? The law is there to protect us, yet our children could be spending this weekend at a friends house where a pervert lives. We have no way of knowing........Does that creep you out the same way it does me?


35 posted on 10/27/2005 1:19:34 PM PDT by Rose of Sharn (I get the best answers when I talk to myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BikerNYC

The charges came about after one of the victims, now in his 30s, recalled the sexual abuse during a psychotherapy session in November...

Oh, yes. Repressed memories. I'm going to get something on my parents one of these days

But on a serious note, this is a possible occurance. A very dear friend of mine, whom I basically consider family was molested by her uncle between ages 3 to 5. She blocked the memories out for years and she, unfortunately, ended up getting pregnant at 17 and that's when she remembered her molestation.


36 posted on 10/27/2005 1:19:41 PM PDT by xavnhoutx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: xavnhoutx
That is sad, yet so true. In fact there are so many people out there in this world, that were sexually and mentally abused as kids, yet too scared to do anything about it. Through no fault of their own, they considered themselves to blame.
They grow up and try and forget it and the offender goes free.
We will never really know the figures of this, but I believe they are much higher than anyone would ever think.
37 posted on 10/27/2005 1:25:04 PM PDT by Rose of Sharn (I get the best answers when I talk to myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: JZelle
At first I started to get mad. Then I got to this part:

The charges came about after one of the victims, now in his 30s, recalled the sexual abuse during a psychotherapy session in November,

If he is in his 30s and couldn't remember what happened then I really doubt something happened. Sounds like a psycho-psychotherapist to me.

38 posted on 10/27/2005 1:31:15 PM PDT by TXBubba ( Democrats: If they don't abort you then they will tax you to death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xavnhoutx
ages 3 to 5

This age range is very different from a 12 year old. A 12 year old isn't going to "forget" something happened. He might be ashamed (though it wasn't his fault) but he isn't going to forget. Something is wrong here.

39 posted on 10/27/2005 1:33:47 PM PDT by TXBubba ( Democrats: If they don't abort you then they will tax you to death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: TXBubba
A 12 year old who has been sexually abused, can be so abused, menatally and physically, that they are left feeling ashamed at what this pervert did to them. In some way they feel like it was their fault, so no one is told, therefore no crime is reported, this child hunkers down and pretends the best he can, that nothing happened. To save HIS face.
Then, as an adult, this memory is allowed to come back and the humiliation and wrongness of it is only too clear. This happens time and time again.
The only thing wrong I see is some people may be judging a 12 year old as an adult and think that he should have been brave enough to come forward with his horror. Often reality is far far different.
40 posted on 10/27/2005 3:21:12 PM PDT by Rose of Sharn (I get the best answers when I talk to myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Condor51

Aren't these registration laws retroactive?


41 posted on 10/27/2005 6:54:10 PM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
"You can't pass a law and then apply it retroactively."

He couldn't have committed the crime THAT long ago. He was just sentenced for it on Monday. Surely if he had committed it in the 80's than your reasoning would apply but I find it hard to believe that he committed the crime THAT LONG AGO and only sentenced NOW. I know the court system is slow but OVER TWENTY YEARS to be sentenced?
42 posted on 10/27/2005 6:56:57 PM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rose of Sharn
this memory is allowed to come back

This memory never went away. He just never told anyone. I said the same thing about the "being ashamed" in my post.

43 posted on 10/28/2005 7:48:23 AM PDT by TXBubba ( Democrats: If they don't abort you then they will tax you to death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: nmh

Oh, good grief.

He was just brought to trial NOW, which is why he was just sentenced NOW. The victim waited until NOW to charge the guy. Fortunately for the victim (and other possible victims), there appears to be no statute of limitations on child molestation in this state (or it is a very long time).

The sex offender registry law went into effect long after he had committed the crime. The law applies to when the perp COMMITTED the crime, not when he is CONVICTED. Megan's law was not a law when the perp committed the crime, therefore it does not apply to him.

This is an excellent demonstration of our constitutional protection against Ex Post Facto laws. I do not personally like the result, but this is exactly why it was included in the Bill of Rights; so that nobody can be punished retroactively by a law that is written AFTER the fact.


44 posted on 10/28/2005 10:00:36 AM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp

Geesh!

Totally disgusted.


45 posted on 10/28/2005 10:02:30 AM PDT by nmh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
The sex offender registry law went into effect long after he had committed the crime. The law applies to when the perp COMMITTED the crime, not when he is CONVICTED. Megan's law was not a law when the perp committed the crime, therefore it does not apply to him.

This is an excellent demonstration of our constitutional protection against Ex Post Facto laws. I do not personally like the result, but this is exactly why it was included in the Bill of Rights; so that nobody can be punished retroactively by a law that is written AFTER the fact.


I think you are mistaken. The Supreme Court has judged that sex offender registries are not punitive in nature and, therefore, do not fall within he constitutional provision prohibiting ex post facto laws.

In Smith v. Doe, the Court said:

Respondents John Doe I and John Doe II were convicted of sexual abuse of a minor, an aggravated sex offense. John Doe I pleaded nolo contendere after a court determination that he had sexually abused his daughter for two years, when she was between the ages of 9 and 11; John Doe II entered a nolo contendere plea to sexual abuse of a 14-year-old child. Both were released from prison in 1990 and completed rehabilitative programs for sex offenders. Although convicted before the passage of the Act, respondents are covered by it. After the initial registration, they are required to submit quarterly verifications and notify the authorities of any changes. Both respondents, along with respondent Jane Doe, wife of John Doe I, brought an action under Rev. Stat. §1979, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking to declare the Act void as to them under the Ex Post Facto Clause of Article I, §10, cl. 1, of the Constitution and the Due Process Clause of §1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. The United States District Court for the District of Alaska granted summary judgment for petitioners. In agreement with the District Court, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit determined the state legislature had intended the Act to be a nonpunitive, civil regulatory scheme; but, in disagreement with the District Court, it held the effects of the Act were punitive despite the legislature’s intent. In consequence, it held the Act violates the Ex Post Facto Clause. Doe v. Otte, 259 F.3d 979 (2001). We granted certiorari. 534 U.S. 1126 (2002).

The Court reversed the 9th Circuit, holding that requiring registration of sex offenders convicted prior to enacted of the sex offender registration act was not punitive and, therefore, did not violate the ex post facto clause.
46 posted on 10/28/2005 10:25:28 AM PDT by BikerNYC (Modernman should not have been banned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: BikerNYC; nmh

You made me do a bit of research. You are correct. It was a 2003 decision. I don't know how the court could decide that forcing somebody to register as a sex offender every place he/she goes isn't punishment, but they surely did. It is like putting somebody on probation forever, regardless of their sentence, and regardless of whether the law was in place when the crime was committed.

(for the record, I am totally in favor of Megan's law, I just don't see how the court rationalized making it retroactive).

I never thought that the court could do something like this. Then again, I never thought that eminent domain could be used to steal private property to sell it to large developers to increase the tax base either.

Regardless, I stand corrected.


47 posted on 10/28/2005 11:00:06 AM PDT by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
I agree. I think Megan's Law is punitive and should only apply to people convicted of sex offenses after its enactment.
48 posted on 10/28/2005 11:16:35 AM PDT by BikerNYC (Modernman should not have been banned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: LesbianThespianGymnasticMidget
Well I guess this answered my question to your post on the North Carolina sex offender.
49 posted on 10/28/2005 11:18:44 AM PDT by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh

Apparently not. I just learned that on this thread about a Syrian man in North Caroline that was exempt from registering too:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1511034/posts?page=5#5


50 posted on 10/28/2005 11:20:10 AM PDT by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson