Appeal: Sex Offender Law Makes Homelessness a Crime

[TheSarge]

ATLANTA  —  A strict new Georgia law is designed to keep sex offenders away from children by monitoring how close they live to schools, parks and other spots where kids gather -- and threatens them with strict penalties if they fail to register.

But what about the offenders who don't have an address?

Georgia's Supreme Court on Monday considered whether the law unfairly subjects homeless offenders to a life sentence if they fail register a home address.

The case involves William James Santos, a homeless man and convicted sex offender who was kicked out of a Gainesville homeless shelter in July 2006 and was arrested three months later on charges he failed to register with Georgia's sex offender list.

His lawyers say the law creates a guessing game for Santos and other homeless offenders because it bars them from giving a post office box or simply saying they are homeless.

They also argue that homeless offenders will become a prime target for the measure's tough criminal penalties, which call for a mandatory life in prison sentence for offenders who fail to register their address for a second time.

"These sex offenders, unfortunate enough to have no street address, are subject to life in prison," said Adam Levin, an attorney for Santos. "This gives Mr. Santos and every other sex offender with no address no other right but to fail to comply with the law."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,377581,00.html

[Chris_]

These sex offenders, unfortunate enough to have no street address, are subject to life in prison," said Adam Levin, an attorney for Santos. "This gives Mr. Santos and every other sex offender with no address no other right but to fail to comply with the law."

Works for me.

Sorry, but if you attack children, then you forfeit your right to anything even approaching a "life."  It was only one vote that kept society from putting you down like the dog you are.

[MrsSmith]

I'm guessing this is the same guy:

STATE OF MICHIGAN

COURT OF APPEALS

______________________________

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,
 UNPUBLISHED

December 19, 2000
 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v

WILLIAM JAMES SANTOS,
 No. 217556

Ingham Circuit Court

 
>>>

In 1990, defendant was convicted of attempted first-degree criminal sexual conduct and being a second habitual offender >>>

In June 1998, during an investigation of an unrelated case involving defendant, the police discovered that defendant was not residing at the Hosmer Street address reported in the Lansing Police Department Sex Offender Book, but was residing at 1128 South Platt Street, an address which defendant had never registered>>>

>>>>


Defendant had prior convictions for sodomy in 1974, trespassing in 1977, OUIL in 1983 and 1987, attempted first-degree criminal sexual conduct in 1990, and disturbing the peace in 1998. There was also a charge of driving with a suspended license pending against defendant which arose about two months after he was arraigned for the SORA violation

http://www.michbar.org/opinions/appeals/2000/121900/8840.html

This one ain't never gonna learn.  Throw away the key. 

[rich_t]

These sex offenders, unfortunate enough to have no street address, are subject to life in prison," said Adam Levin, an attorney for Santos. "This gives Mr. Santos and every other sex offender with no address no other right but to fail to comply with the law."

Works for me.

Sorry, but if you attack children, then you forfeit your right to anything even approaching a "life."  It was only one vote that kept society from putting you down like the dog you are.

Yup.

[Chris_]

These sex offenders, unfortunate enough to have no street address, are subject to life in prison," said Adam Levin, an attorney for Santos. "This gives Mr. Santos and every other sex offender with no address no other right but to fail to comply with the law."

Works for me.

Sorry, but if you attack children, then you forfeit your right to anything even approaching a "life."  It was only one vote that kept society from putting you down like the dog you are.

Yup.

And of course, we are led to the question about what kind of a slime ball defends a scum bag.  I know everyone is accorded a defense, but there is nothing that compels anyone to provide it, absent a judges order.  I defy anyone to provide the paperwork that says a judge forced this lawyer to defend this pedophile.

If UBL was brought to the USA tomorrow, there would be thousands -- nay millions -- of barristers wanting to represent him.

Lawyers are the lowest life form on Earth.

Below muslims, even.

[PatriotGame]

WANTED:
Democrat party voter role model. Requirements are as follows:

Must have prior convictions for sodomy in 1974, trespassing in 1977, OUIL in 1983 and 1987, attempted first-degree criminal sexual conduct in 1990, and disturbing the peace in 1998. There was also a charge of driving with a suspended license pending against defendant which arose about two months after he was arraigned for the SORA violation.
Or similar....

[EastFacingNorth]

These sex offenders, unfortunate enough to have no street address, are subject to life in prison," said Adam Levin, an attorney for Santos. "This gives Mr. Santos and every other sex offender with no address no other right but to fail to comply with the law."

Works for me.

Sorry, but if you attack children, then you forfeit your right to anything even approaching a "life."  It was only one vote that kept society from putting you down like the dog you are.

I don't know the particulars of this guy's case, but I can't in good conscience accept a state of affairs that could sentence a man to life in prison for the crime of having consensual sex with a girl a week before her eighteenth birthday.  Such a thing could conceivably happen in such a setup.

[rich_t]

These sex offenders, unfortunate enough to have no street address, are subject to life in prison," said Adam Levin, an attorney for Santos. "This gives Mr. Santos and every other sex offender with no address no other right but to fail to comply with the law."

Works for me.

Sorry, but if you attack children, then you forfeit your right to anything even approaching a "life."  It was only one vote that kept society from putting you down like the dog you are.

I don't know the particulars of this guy's case, but I can't in good conscience accept a state of affairs that could sentence a man to life in prison for the crime of having consensual sex with a girl a week before her eighteenth birthday.  Such a thing could conceivably happen in such a setup.

I understand what you are saying, but the law is the law.  If the gal is that close to being "legal" then waiting another week isn't a huge sacrifice.