Home » Speed dating » Free Sex Registry In Australia

Free sex registry in australia. Navigation menu

free sex registry in australia

Contents:

  1. This is what an Australian sex offender registry would look like
  2. It's time to rethink sex offender registers
  3. You've hit members-only content.
  4. Tasmanian police to check on sex offenders

The Sims 3 Custom Content FREE Downloads, WOULD you want to know if a convicted sex sex was living next door or down the street? That information could soon be at your fingertips. The US sex offender registry under Megan's Law shows the details of convicted sex offenders, including name, photo, address and crimes.

Govt to ban overseas free for paedophiles Source IMAGINE if finding out whether or not a dangerous, convicted sex offender was living next door or down the street was as simple as the click of a mouse. At your fingertips would be a photo, name, address, physical description, known aliases and australia of the crimes committed by the criminal.

Each listed offender might be ranked by the level of danger registry pose to the community with individual risk assessments on their profiles.

This is what an Australian sex offender registry would look like

It was named after seven-year-old Megan Kanka, who was raped and killed by a known child molester who had moved across the street from the family without their knowledge.

There are more than convicted sex offenders registered on the site just in downtown Los Angeles, California, alone.

Australian senator Derryn Hinch wants a similar register in Australia.

How to register BoostSpeed. How to upgrade BoostSpeed to ver. What product is best for me. Founded in in Sydney, Australia, Auslogics has grown into an industry leader in the production of computer maintenance and optimization software for Microsoft Windows. Contact us if you require an evaluation copy of the software for review, screenshots, box shots or other graphics. Media and Press Inquiries. Affiliate or Reseller Program. Website or Software Suggestions. Build your own customized solutions based on our technology.

  • Free sex registry in australia Jun 1,
  • Oct 25, - There are few
There are many sex offender registry services out there, but if you're looking in Australia, your best option is to run a sex offenders search by using the unique. Jun 14, - This is what an Australian sex offender registry would look like The US Department of Justice operates a free national sex offender public.

There are few measurable benefits in having a public sex offender registry like the one launched in Western Australia last week, according to academic studies of similar instruments already operating in the US and the UK. National, sex-offender registration began in the US in The UK has a similar law that was introduced in , covering the whole of England and Wales since Each law is named for the victims whose deaths became the catalysts for the press and the public to demand the registration of convicted sex offenders.

In the UK it's known as "Sarah's Law". The more benignly named Community Protection Western Australia site that went live last week provides the public with details for dangerous or repeat offenders. It also allows WA residents to search their local area for registered offenders and for parents and guardians to request a check on a specific individual. It did not result from moral panic surrounding one particularly heinous crime.

It was simply a law and order promise in the state's election campaign. WA Minister for Police Liza Harvey acknowledges this, stating the state government "believes that it will be a useful community awareness and information tool for WA families".

By many accounts the registry and online listing will do little to prevent sexual assaults.

It's time to rethink sex offender registers

The US study showed that Australian statistics show that more than half of all sexual assault victims knew their attacker. US studies found that registration does nothing to stop reoffending.

Found guilty of five serious child sex offences against the year-old girl in Jailed for eight years, with a minimum sentence of four years and 10 months. Beavis has appealed his sentence. Pleaded guilty to two charges — inflicting actual bodily harm with intent to have sexual intercourse and having aggravated sexual intercourse without consent.

Jailed for at least five years, despite suffering from chronic ill-health. Stay updated via RSS. Andrew James Benn Posted: John Marshall Clegg Posted: June 8, by Serendipity in NSW.

My name is Tegan Wagner. They were jailed for many years and today, one of my rapists walks free. Please sign this petition. I cannot reveal my real name.

Free sex registry in australia Jun 14, - This is what an Australian sex offender registry would look like The US Department of Justice operates a free national sex offender public. free sex registry in australia. Yahoo! Canada Answers - Is there any free. sex offender registry - my son, who is now 30, was charged and. Next question: US.
WA has a new public register of sex offenders. What does the research show on the benefits or otherwise of similar schemes in the US and the UK? The Liberals should stop pretending to enjoy beer and leave it to the ALP. No Liberal leader has ever looked natural while drinking a beer. Meanwhile, Labor has known the visual language of beer in every era and election. Bryan Walter Beattie Posted: Robert John Beavis Posted: George William Hodges Posted: Posted October 22, Sex offender registers have little or no impact on offending rates and can be palpably unjust, so Australian policymakers should follow the lead of the US in rethinking the need for them, writes Greg Barns.

Sex offenders are different. Not content with conviction and jail time, our society wants to continue to punish those who commit offences of a sexual nature against children in particular for years after they have served their sentence. Following the lead of the US, which introduced sex offender registers in the s, Australian states and territories insist on sex offenders having limitations put on where they can live, with whom they can associate and what they can read and watch for up to 15 years after they are convicted.

The consequences of an individual being placed on a sex offender register by a court are profound.

You've hit members-only content.

Free sex registry in australia In fact, it is fair to say that our courts and legislatures discriminate against sex offenders by treating them differently to those who commit serious offences like murder or fraud.

Finding housing and employment becomes extraordinarily difficult for those placed on a sex offender register. I have acted for many clients over the past decade who find themselves unable to live in accommodation because there are children living in the same apartment block. And a person who committed an offence against a teenage girl 30 years ago, but who is no longer deemed any risk will not be able to get a job involving any contact with children.

Sex offender registers are generally of little utility. In the US Department of Justice published a study it had commissioned on the impact of the first sex offender register in that country, which was established in New Jersey in and is colloquially known as "Megan's Law", after the name of the victim in a particularly horrific child sex case. The study found that "Megan's Law showed no demonstrable effect in reducing sexual re-offenses".

A sex offender register is costly, and does not represent value for taxpayers' money, the study found. The irrationality of sex offender register laws is also borne out by the evidence that suggests that such registers have little or no impact on sex offending rates. Studies of the impact of community notification on recidivism have not produced uniform findings.

However, on balance, the available empirical evidence does not provide support for the contention that community notification is an effective means of reducing recidivism. The other aspect of irrationality in policy making relating to sex offender registers is that it grossly exaggerates what is termed "stranger danger".

In reality, ninety-three percent of sex offenders who perpetrate crimes against children know their victims. Children are much more likely to be abused by someone they know and trust, than an unknown individual holding out candy from a dark sedan.

Up until now there have been few successful challenges to sex offender registration. But fortunately the tide might be beginning to turn, particularly around historic offences. The notion that a person who is convicted of a sex offence that occurred 30 or 40 years ago should be placed on a register today and be subject to the hardship it imposes is palpably unjust.

In a significant win for the rights of persons convicted of sex offences one US state court has recently agreed with this proposition. The Maryland Court of Appeals, in a decision handed down on June 30 this year, said that to force a person onto that state's sex offender register, in existence since , for an offence committed prior to that date amounts to a retrospective application of the law and is unconstitutional in Maryland.

The result of this decision is that about individuals who are currently on the Maryland sex offender register will have their names removed. In Oklahoma, that state's highest court last year ruled similarly to Maryland and there are now challenges to the retrospectivity of sex offender register laws in other American states, including New Hampshire. Challenges to sex offender registry laws on the basis of their imposing a retrospective punishment on an individual might succeed in Australia on the basis that when a person is convicted of a historic offence the law that applied at the time of offending is the basis for punishment.

Placing a person on a sex offender register should be viewed as a punishment given the negative impact it has on an individual's privacy, freedom of movement and economic liberty, and if the offence occurred prior to the register becoming law then it is unfair to impose this punishment now. The introduction of sex offender registries in Australia has meant discrimination against one type of criminal law offender over others and for little or no gain in terms of community safety.

It is time that we took stock of the unfairness of these registers. The US, the home of sex offender register laws, is now beginning to rethink the need for having registers of such a broad scope, and Australian policy makers and courts should do likewise. Greg Barns is a barrister and a spokesman for the Australian Lawyers Alliance.

A timely and thoughtful piece Agreed, no restrictions on where a murder or violent person can live but plenty on a sex offender.

I'd like to see a total rethink on the concept of punishment. I know this might sound crass but value for money does putting someone in jail actually help society? It cost a bundle in legal fees and incarceration but does it really stop more crime?

We've been fighting the war on drugs forever and drugs are still winning by a mile. There must be a better way of dealing with behaviour society considers undesirable. Putting violent criminals in jail is an immense benefit to society. Every day they sit in a cell, they're no longer posing a threat. If we could jail criminals cheaply, we'd just give most of them a mandatory life term and write them off entirely. Most of society wouldn't shed a tear.

I would also like to have a rethink on punishment. For some reason, many people see jail as being a form of social debt repayment for naughty citizens. Do the crime, do the time, then walk out and all is forgiven. But jail shouldn't be about punishment. It should be about protection and preventing reoffence. Every time a criminal reoffends, it represents a failure of the system - a sign that the criminal shouldn't have been released in the first place. Let's not forget that many behind bars have a history of being abused themselves.

If we are really interested in "protection and preventing reoffence" then perhaps we could focus more on getting to the bottom of why some people offend in the first place. I do not believe that every offender is simply a troubled soul but nor do I readily adhere to black and white versions of humanity. I'm sure some people are just bad, but others may benefit from treatment over incarceration. Of course there needs to be a punishment aspect, it's supposed to be a deterrent.

I'm not necessarily suggesting incarceration is necessary for all, it should be about those things you mention, it should also be about recomponsense. There is a 'debt to society' but doing time doesn't repay that debt, just keeps you out of society in some cases appropriately. We're just following the US model, inevitability resulting in privatisation and therefore a commodity. In general, offenders need to be included in society, not isolated from positive influences.

Putting someone in gaol certainly helps society in many cases. Career criminals, those with a psychopathic bent, or just plain villains are taken out of circulation for a period of time -- and they are generally not committing crime within general society -- although they may in gaol.

Organised crime is an exception, since rackets have been successfully run from within gaol ; even hitmen have been released to perform a hit, then readmitted with the perfect alibi that they "were in gaol".

In general, though, society gets a break from those individuals who have caused problems. Prof, you've either seen far too many movies or have a far too active imagination.

Hit men getting out of gaol to commit murder and mayhem then sneaking back inside as an alibi for their heinous crimes???? What sort of idiot would do that? Not a very good hit man I'm sure. Not that I'd mind if it were true, as long as they just took care of the target and didn't kill or maim innocent bystanders in the process.

The author's contention that being on a sex offenders register is unjust punishment because it is a lifelong burden is misplaced in cases of serious child sexual abuse because the effects of the crime on the victim are also a lifelong burden.

The author also neatly elides between the above argument, which seems to be his main point, and the argument about retrospectivity, on which he is on firmer ground but which is a side issue.

The biggest problem with sex offenders registers, and with our laws regarding sexual offences in general, is mandatory sentencing and the lack of distinction between a 40 year old molesting a 9 year old and a 16 year old having sex or possessing naked pictures, of their 15 year old girlfriend.

I have always thought that the Sex Offenders' register has been more about placating the more excitable members of the public. The author's argument is flawed. The register doesn't exist to punish offenders after they've served their sentence. But I agree that the register hasn't been proven to prevent reoffending.

So instead, the system should be redesigned to serve as a means of warning the public. Tattoos on the forehead would be preferable. That way, potential victims know to be on their guard whenever the individual is around them.

By your logic we can stack extra years onto any conviction where the law has become harsher over time - say, drugs. It's a part of their sentence now so why not? It wasn't a part of their sentence then, it shouldn't be retroactively applied now. It's not 'part of their sentence'. Their sentence is the total period of imprisonment that the sentencing Court considers adequately reflects the overall criminality of case, they serve a portion of that term before being released on parole where they remain under supervision, under threat of being imprisoned for the remainder of the term if they reoffend, until the total period of the head sentence finishes.

Being named on a sex offender register is a lifelong burden. Consider the impact on a 15 year old boy who has a girlfriend that is 14 or 15 and they send each other nude pictures of themselves.

Technically the boy could be charged and convicted of procuring a child to perform an indecent act or producing child pornography. If convicted, he'd be named on a sex offender register because he and his girlfriend did what many others their age or older do with no issues WA Ideas Just a small aside - I believe the boy needs to be more than 2 years older than the girl for it to be considered a crime.

It is rare to read a carefully reasoned discussion of sex offender punishment. I have personal experience of the impact of the punishment of sex offenders. A family friend was gaoled for indecent dealing with a 9 year old.

He was a slightly autistic 16 year old at the time, and ended up as a odd year old being dragged through the courts. He lost everything, and will spend the rest of his life on benefits. The "victim" made a few tens of thousands of dollars. Noone stamnds to gain by this person being on any kind of register. In all other crimes, including the most vile rapes and assaults and even murder, the completion of gaol time means the punishment has been done and dusted.

It would seem to me that the problem with so many of the serial sex offenders we read about is that they are slapped on the wrist as juveniles, by lenient magistrates.

Your comment, by using "victim", infers the 9 year old child was to blame for a 16 year old's actions.

The child was a victim, not a "victim. Please be mindful of how you put things: People who have suffered at the hands of others do not deserve to be further victimised by insensitivity. While I agree, I think the fact that no gaol time was given would be more hurtful to that poor girl and her family. I have a question, Hellen. If your family friend had sexually abused you when you were nine, would you use quotation marks when referring to yourself as a victim?

Why is that so important to you? I suspect the absolutism in these cases is ultimately of no benefit to the victims, who - almost surely, it seems to me - would be made to feel guilty by the reactions of those around them.

If you're suggesting that a nine year old isn't really a victim then there's something seriously wrong with you. One presumes your reference to the victim making money relates to crime compensation. Given that this sort of trauma can lead to decades of problems which may never be resolved and which realistically may require the victim to fund their own therapy tens of thousands of dollars is somewhat token compensation.

Sexual offenders registers are pointless, designed to satisfy the juvenile and petty lust for punishment of bogan tabloid readers. But the reason your friend was "dragged through the courts" was because he committed a crime that quite often destroys people's lives against a nine year-old girl. That's what the courts are for. I thought everyone knew that. The fact that your sympathies lie with the perpetrator and not the abused girl, demonstrate exactly why we need these courts.

Because some people really do think it's no big deal, which is, frankly, bordering on sociopathic. I still prefer registers than no registers.

As you can see from the post, the guy did not do time. So if they are not locked up, they can at least let us know where they will be so we can do our best to avoid him.

Remember, the perps identity would be repressed in the proceedings, so a register is the only way to know the truth - every other crime is public record.

Our justice system is indeed flawed, perhaps actually failed, but it is not because of lenience - which is rare indeed - but because of this one-dimensional focus on punishment. I think you'll find the courts are considerably more sophisticated than the constant calls for vengeance in the Murdoch press might suggest.

I'm certainly no expert, but I believe judges are required to take into account several factors when sentencing criminals - including the impact of the crime on the victim, the background and state of mind of the perpetrator, the need to deter future crimes, the right of the criminal for an opportunity to reform themselves, and past sentences for similar crimes. Balancing all these things is difficult and complex. Which I guess is why the perception so often seems to be that our courts are too lenient.

Because the people who argue for draconian punishments generally know little or nothing of the specific details of the cases and the sentences against which they rail, they just know someone did a bad thing and they want them punished. You can find the same moral reasoning in pre-school children. You are questioning the victim? That she received a paltry few thousand. I could not give a proverbial about the perpetrator being autistic.

He did the deed and society should take no further risks that he ruin another girls life. And I stand to gain by him being on a register if he has to be let out in the first place. By the sound of your post he did not even go to gaol which is truly shocking - and people like me continue to pay his "benefits".

So, how does the register benefit me? Well, if he moved into my street, I would move away. It is that simple.

People like you can still ignore the register - gee, you can even have him babysit for you - but people like me can use that information to protect my family. What is wrong with the community knowing the truth? Only the police should have to know where past sex offenders live. If the cops give that information out to the public, they should be punished for it. Surely location devices are so small now that they can be hidden on a person so their actions can be traced compared to the old ankle bracelets.

If the person is detected without wearing it, it should be back to gaol! The USA is not Australia. A state's law there is a different matter to how we would go about this, any register should be created and maintained by the AFP.

That is logical as offenders may move within states to escape their past. I don't see that it would be a huge issue for the Parliament to do that. We already have legislation to deal with war crimes. An argument that it can't be a criminal matter because we didn't have an Australian laws against committing war crimes in won't work. However, a register will do little to combat the horrific systematic abuse and trafficking of children in other nations.

Anything we do here must fit into an international policing effort to stop that. If it accomplishes nothing, what's the point of our hard-earneds funding it? And retrospective legislation is an affront to the rule of law. As it was at Nuremberg. Retrospectivity should never be applied to crimes. If something you do is legal today, you shouldn't be punished if it becomes defined as a crime tomorrow. But in this case, there is no retrospectivity.

Rape was a crime yesterday. It remains a crime today. The offender was convicted and punished. The register is merely a social system regarding their rehabilitation. The register is designed to: Prevent offenders from posing a threat to others; and 2.

Notify society that the offender poses a threat. Both are connected to rehabilitation, not punishment. Neither of those cited benefits concerns the rehabilitation of the offender. Nor have either of those things been shown to arise from this policy anyway. Yeah, you're right I suppose. Although I wonder if the people damning the register, some of whom make some reasonable points, would feel that way if it were their 6-year old who had been sodomised.

I would imagine that you are correct - most arguing against the register probably have no experience of being around a victim of these crimes. BUT, in this country we do not let the victims of crimes set the punishment for the offender. That would be vengeance rather than justice. The register is not designed to rehabilitate the offender.

Rehabilitation is achieved through psychological intervention and treatment and by reintegrating the offender into society. After all, rehabilitation is about reintegrating the offender into society so that they can be an ordinary functioning citizen. By naming a person on a register and 'notifying society that the offender poses a threat' in fact prevents the offender from reintegrating into society as they are driven out of town after town, as was the case of a sex offender released on parole in WA earlier this year.

Also, being named on a register does not prevent the offender from reoffending. To suggest that it can puts the practical effect of the register far too highly in terms of crime prevention. Being named on a register does no more to prevent further sexual offences than a violence restraining order does to prevent physical abuse. In either case, the piece of paper will never stop the person named on it from committing an offence that they would otherwise freely do.

Sex offender registers are only there to appease the masses and give them the illusion that they are safe, or alternatively to assist the lynch mobs to locate past offenders and take their own action as vigilantes. I am sorry but "Placing a person on a sex offender register should be viewed as a punishment given the negative impact it has on an individual's privacy, freedom of movement and economic liberty, and if the offence occurred prior to the register becoming law then it is unfair to impose this punishment now", is not a position I believe we should take as a society.

You see, the abused child has also received a "punishment", that was neither warranted, nor solicited. I view ANY form of child abuse as particulary sickening, and believe that anyone who commits an offence forfeits their right to be intergrated into the community.

As you state in your article, a register has no outcome on reoffending rates, so by default you admit the propensity to reoffend. I would suggest that the rights of children should be placed at forefront of any policy, given that the trauma can last many decades. If the offender is also effected for decades, while by no means equal to the victims suffering, it should only be viewed as a "bonus".

I also suggest that no pedophile be granted "protective custordy" whilst incarcerated. The child had no protection, why should these scum? If it was only pedophiles I would agree with you. Problem is it's scope. Teenagers "sextexting" can and do get caught up. Victorian law stipulates that if the age difference is 2 years or less there is no offense for sexual intercourse between two people.

Other states are different. A scenario which has happened: Two teenagers have consensual sex. She sends him an unsolicited picture which he does not delete he does not on forward.

Her parents find out and go to police, his computer is seized and the picture found. He is charged with a child pornography offense and sex with a minor.

Found guilty he is placed on a sex register. This means at 17 his life is in the toilet with no hope of redemption. No chance for education cannot go to school as he cannot be in contact with minors and little hope for a job. She although committing an offense generating child pornography is not charged. There are quite number of these type scenario's which have happened. Recently an SA judge refused to find guilt under similar circumstances deeming the charge should not have been brought and if found guilty would have to be placed on the sex register.

He also questioned why she was not charged with having sex with a minor both under 16 at the time only him. That deals with one particular group that may appear on the register but what about others? For example transvestites who want hormone drugs that, in Australia are only available to sex offenders and their doctor helped them obtain them?

Or young people who are charged with statutory rape for having consensual sex with their partner at the time? Or what about teenagers or people in early twenties dating someone underage who sends them a nude, which thereby makes them a trafficker in child pornography?

There should never, ever be a set punishment or program for a particular crime. One aspect of sex offender registers is the courts often don't have the ability NOT to list someone so people are punished far beyond the actual scope of their crime. If, as you suggest, the rights of children should be placed at the forefront, you should be very much against a sex offender registry, given the US experience.

One interesting outcome was that where a child was abused by a family member, such as a grandfather, uncle, brother or cousin, the family was less likely to report the crime to police, due to the trauma to be visited on a beloved family member.

Tasmanian police to check on sex offenders


Moral panic: does public registration of sex offenders work? Oct 21, - Sex offender register laws have little or no impact on offending rates and can introduced sex offender registers in the s, Australian states and territories from 'our' errant, footloose and fancy-free society and culture. Mar 20, - NSW and many other Australian states impose harsh restrictions on those convicted of child sex offences. Learn more about the NSW Child. Oct 25, - There are few measurable benefits in having a public sex offender registry like the one launched in Western Australia last week, according to. Free sex registry in australia



Ctegory: