Posted on 04/01/2008 2:58:51 PM PDT by george76
I was just being agreeable. And sharing.
Not Guilty!!!! And apparently an nympho. I’m in love
This is the second time in less than a year an adult at Brighton Charter High has been investigated for having an inappropriate relationship with a student.That sounds like one hell of a charter school.
Not guilty and she should be able to collect damages.
That’s what I was thinking.
Our judicial system is totally nuts to even consider such a “sentence”.
I believe the justice system has un-constitutionally delegated its powers to a bunch of pointy-headed shrinks. Who get to drive around in shiny new German imports thanks to the forced business. Nice work if you can get it.
As a condition for parole or probation, sex offenders usually must submit to rigorous courses of psychotherapy, restrictions on their lives, and regular polygraphs.
For a subset of sex offenders, strict treatment with very strict rules for life conduct has been found to reduce recidivism.
For folks offered parole under these conditions, the choice is to accept these conditions or go to (or stay in) jail.
sitetest
NO WAY!!!!!
You're not a pointy headed shrink are you???
From what I can garner from a quick search of the internet:
Several studies present optimistic conclusions about the effectiveness of treatment programs that are empirically based, offense-specific, and comprehensive (Lieb, Quinsey, and Berliner, 1998). The only meta-analysis of treatment outcome studies to date has found a small, yet significant treatment effect—an 8% reduction in the recidivism rate for offenders who participated in treatment (Hall, 1995).
"For folks offered parole under these conditions, the choice is to accept these conditions or go to (or stay in) jail."
Yet making their conditions of probation such that their violation of those conditions is an almost certainty doesn't seem to make much sense.
You're not a pointy headed shrink are you???
From what I can garner from a quick search of the internet:
Several studies present optimistic conclusions about the effectiveness of treatment programs that are empirically based, offense-specific, and comprehensive (Lieb, Quinsey, and Berliner, 1998). The only meta-analysis of treatment outcome studies to date has found a small, yet significant treatment effect—an 8% reduction in the recidivism rate for offenders who participated in treatment (Hall, 1995).
"For folks offered parole under these conditions, the choice is to accept these conditions or go to (or stay in) jail."
Yet making their conditions of probation such that their violation of those conditions is an almost certainty doesn't seem to make much sense.
“You're not a pointy headed shrink are you???”
Well, I don't know about pointy-headed, but I'm not a mental health professional. Years ago, I thought to become one, but I dropped out of grad school in 1983, and went into a technology-related field, where I've been ever since.
“Several studies present optimistic conclusions about the effectiveness of treatment programs that are empirically based, offense-specific, and comprehensive (Lieb, Quinsey, and Berliner, 1998). The only meta-analysis of treatment outcome studies to date has found a small, yet significant treatment effect—an 8% reduction in the recidivism rate for offenders who participated in treatment (Hall, 1995).”
I'm not sufficiently immersed in the field to say one way or other, but I think that there is more recent research than 1995 and 1998. I know that techniques in use have certainly been updated in that time, as have criteria on who should get the chance to participate.
“Yet making their conditions of probation such that their violation of those conditions is an almost certainty doesn't seem to make much sense.”
I don't view forbidding the use of drugs and alcohol, restrictions on personal relationships, or strict curfews as being restrictions that will almost certainly be violated. The restrictions ARE very strict, but they seem to be necessary to offer any hope of avoiding further offenses.
Frankly, many of these restrictions are based on stuff right out of AA. Obviously, substance abuse isn't permitted in AA, and new members are strongly discouraged from entering into new intimate relationships for at least six months to a year. The curfews aren't unusual for folks on probation for any range of crimes.
If folks want to lock up sex offenders forever, I understand that point of view, although I'm not sure that life in prison without parole is necessarily appropriate for every sex offender. Would anyone here lock this woman up for life? But if sex offenders are to be released eventually, then it would do well to require them to participate in intensive programs designed to avoid re-offending.
sitetest
Welcome to the Puritan Paradise, the Saudi Arabia for the Enlightened and overeducated!
Get a sense of humor, otherwise all you say is just fishtalk.
I have a sense of humor.
I’m laughing at YOU.
Awwwwwwwwwwwww. How sweet. A fish laughs at BOB.
That’s my mission....to bring truth & laughs to FR.
I’m am pleased.
Now you ARE making me smile.
Take care and NAIL that babe, Bob.
NOT GUILTY!!!!!! The treatment team needs to get a life.
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.