Molester exempt from sex offender registry

The Washington Times ^ | 10-27-05 | Metro

[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.

[nmh]

Aren't these registration laws retroactive?

[nmh]

"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?

[TXBubba]

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.

[wyattearp]

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.

[nmh]

Geesh!

Totally disgusted.

[BikerNYC]

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.

[wyattearp]

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.

[BikerNYC]

I agree. I think Megan's Law is punitive and should only apply to people convicted of sex offenses after its enactment.

[Calpernia]

Well I guess this answered my question to your post on the North Carolina sex offender.

[Calpernia]

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

[nmh]

Unbelievable!

This stuff needs to be retroactive regardless of when they molested. It's nuts!

[nmh]

It's becoming crazier and crazier. Next they'll be puzzled when people igonre our "justice" system and take the law into their own hands.

There was NO justice served here and kids are at risk as he thumbs his nose at just punishment.

[wyattearp]

What really pisses me off about this case isn't the registration thing (it's just where the conversation went), but the fact that this POS got 3 months instead of 4-9 years. Unreal.

It is because of cases like this one that otherwise law-abiding people have already begun to take the law into their own hands. Unfortunately, juries keep putting the killers of child molesters in jail.

[Calpernia]

bump