DUer has nowhere to turn for help (SEX OFFENDER)

[Omaha Steve]

Last edited Mon Aug 10, 2015, 02:42 PM - Edit history (6)

Bob is a registered sex offender.

Can't work because of his health and is waiting on approval of SSDI. IF you want to help send a donation to his Paypal account @ [e-mail].

A misconception that PayPal will take a percentage (they won't, if the money isn't marked as being for goods or services

OS

[Sunlei]

1. If you could please give the name of the bills he has, who to pay directly, perhaps I or

some other reader here will cover one or some of the monthly bills.

I am reluctant to send money to paypal and other online funding places because they take almost 10 percent and we don't know how the cash is applied.

[merrily]

5. Good idea, but we'd have to coordinate, or his lights would go out while 5 of us pay the

same phone bill.

[Sunlei]

10. you're right we have to coordinate. but even if he got 5 months of phone paid, the utility's

hold and use advance payments. For example I pay some of my utility bills 6 months in advance, so I don't have to worry about a bill on time each month for the tiny bills.

counts to your credit report to pay bills on time and I don't use auto debit bank feature to pay most monthly regular bills.

[merrily]

12. True, but you don't want the phone bill paid 5 months ahead while the lights go off next week.

[Sunlei]

14. you're right.

ok, thanks. I'm going to shut off DU & get out of my office before it gets to hot outside.

[merrily]

15. Enjoy the day.

[jwirr]

106. That is an excellent idea. Friends here on DU have helped me in the past. One of the things I did

was email them my account number and where to sent the help. That allows the person doing the help to know that they are really helping you and how.

I have been very thankful for the help I have received in the past. Hope that Bob gets the help he needs.




Off subject. Steve when we buy things from Bernie's store is there a way to factor it into DU for Bernie? Just wondering as I am going to get a few things next month.

[merrily]

2. Last I knew, there was a federal program. based on quarters worked and disability and

a state program, based on financial need and disability. I think SSDI is the federal program and SSI is the state program.

The names are similar and I'm always confusing them, but other DUers have been/are on the state program and would know.

One of the purposes of the state program is to tide people over until the slower federal program does its drill.

Has Bob applied for both?

[dsc]

53. the temporary state program pays a literal pittance

My sister was in this boat last year and she got a whopping 150 a month plus food stamps and crazy low utility bills along with Medicaid. Since she owned her house she merely went into forclosure and had tax problems but didn't get evicted. If he has rent, he would never make it on this tiny amount.

[merrily]

62. Awful.

[Omaha Steve]

68. YES it is

[Person 2713]

76. That would be the $270 a month mentioned in the post may get food stamps but that would be it

The pets may be on special illness diets .
I know a guy I suggested boiling beef bones for pet food so he could use part of his allotment for food to feed the dog, but his dog had some problem and needed pet foods

[merrily]

77. Thanks. Either that was not in the OP until after I posted the question about applying, or I

missed it at the time. I did see it yesterday, though.

[Person 2713]

78. Many people will say to folks can't you get on state aid or welfare? It is so small or nonexistent

Folks are thinking it should cover general needs. No that welfare was gone long ago in the 90 s is my understanding .But.the state of Illinois is not especially cruel, again my understanding is it is like this or less everywhere in US. You might of glanced over it since it is a small amount or info is coming in to OS in steps he then relays. Oh and that small monthly amount can only last a few years it's not meant to be counted on for too long

[merrily]

79. Yes. It's been very different since Clinton, although a poster said Clinton did not

change amounts, only limited time. All I know for certain is that it's not enough, not the amount and not the time.


in fairness, though, I did not say "Can't you get on state welfare." I asked if he had applied because he obviously needs a recurring amount and we don't really know for how long.

[jwirr]

107. SSDI goes through the Social Security Administration and that also takes a lot of time but you are

correct about SSI. The SSI program is easier to qualify for and it is meant to help until you are ether better or confirmed disabled. It is worth applying for.

[LiberalElite]

3. K&R

[Sunlei]

4. or how about the name and address of his close grocery store and someone can send him a

grocery store gift card?

[merrily]

6. Also, has he contacted his Representative and Senators to see if anyone can put a stick of dynamite

under someone in Missouri? (not literally, just break the logjam somehow).

Also, his gofundme site has no facts. Maybe he can modify your great OP to put it into the first person and put it on the gofundme site to increase his chances of donations from people who do not see your OP.

[Demeter]

7. He has to get a lawyer

Unless one is born disabled and applies at 18 (first month of eligibility) the System is designed to wear out and impoverish the applicant.

Take a lawyer BEFORE the money runs out. 2 years is not uncommon for the average application. Beg, borrow, plead. Get professional help.

[magical thyme]

11. he has a lawyer...

the OP says his lawyer's best guess is that he is on the list of people outsourced due to how far his case is overdue (5 months late).

[bananas]

13. The OP mentions "His attorney" a couple of times.

I agree, an attorney is essential for this.

[merrily]

17. I've seen other posts citing two years. That's why the state program is there as well

as being there for people who are disabled, but don't qualify as to lifetime quarters worked.

[mackerel]

56. State programs are in place for only 12 months.

[merrily]

59. Wow. Awful.

[Ghost in the Machine]

58. In my State, you have to be turned down twice before a lawyer will even touch your case! N/T

[mackerel]

72. Not always it depends on many factors.

There is no reason to need an attorney until you get to the hearing level.

1. You do your initial application and 33% get approved at that stage. If you get denied on your initial then you go to step two.
2. You appeal (aka Request for reconsidertation) again 33% get approved at this stage. If you get denied then you to step three.
3. Request for hearing. It takes about 12 months to get a hearing scheduled. This is the stage to start searching for an attorney. You need supportive doctors who will support your claim that you cannot work.

It's a process and stick with you it. If you believe you can not work and will not be able to do gainful sustainable activity then go through the whole process. If you drop it and decide to re-apply later you can not claim back benefits from the original onset date. You have to do all of this with in five years of having last work or you lose your date last insured date.

[Ghost in the Machine]

74. Yes, step 3 means that you have already been twice, & NO LAWYER will get involved until then..

I know this, done been through it myself... my *own* lawyer told me this! He also said that over 2/3rds of the people are automatically denied just because of the backlog of cases that they have in the system.

Peace,

Ghost

[Quackers]

127. Here's a great chart that I really like.

For me, in Ohio, I got a lawyer after receiving my first denial letter. Do to being considered service related, they pushed it through from initial application, two denial letters, and finally an approval from a judge in 8 months.

[Ghost in the Machine]

147. Thanks for the chart! It really explains it better and I don't like arguing with someone who doesn't

seem to understand the FACTS, then turns around and basically says the same thing I just said. In Tennessee, you HAVE to be turned down TWICE before a lawyer will even look at your case! I had one of the best attorneys around and the FIRST THING he asked me when I called was "Have you applied, been turned down, appealed, and been turned down again?". I said "Yes sir". He made me an appointment to see him.

After getting all my paperwork from my Worker's Comp Lawyer, and surgical reports from my Neurosurgeon, he called me about 2 months later and said "I think I have found the problem! Your workers Comp attorney did a GREAT job for you, but they have you listed as able to return to work on "Sedentary Duty", which there isn't any in Commercial Roofing/High-Rise Carpentry, but SSDI says that "Sedentary Duty" means I could sit behind a counter at a convenience store, or sit at a desk all day pushing a pen and papers. Problem with that was that my doctor already had me on 2 pound lifting restrictions, and could not sit, stand, walk or lay for long periods of time... between 2 to 4 hours each.

This was like around June. He told me that if I could get my doctor to write a letter saying that, that it would make things a LOT easier. It just so happened that I had an appointment scheduled with my Neurosurgeon 3 days later. While talking to the doctor, HE asked ME if I had gotten approved for disability yet, and I told him no, and what my lawyer had just said.

My Doc looked at me and said "there is no way in Hell that you will EVER work again, and I will write a letter to your attorney and include copies so he can give them to whoever needs them". We already had a date set for December to see the ALJ for a determination, but I got a call from lawyer in September telling me that we didn't have to go, that my claim had been approved due to the letter from the doctor.

Last month, I got a review letter from Disability to determine whether I was still disabled or not. One of the questions was something like 'In the past 3 months, I have discussed returning to work with my doctor" and the answers were ;No, I haven't spoken with my doctor', 'Yes, and my doctor said that I CANNOT return to work' or 'Yes. and my doctor said I could return to work'. Well, it just so happened that I had just had MRI's done on my thoracic spine and lumbar spine, and had a follow-up with my Neuro for the results in 2 more days.

I took the letter with me, showed it to him, and asked if I could return to work. His response was "HELL NO! you can't return to work, EVER! I will write whoever I need to and stand behind my statements. YOU are 100% LEGIT... disabled for life, and will NEVER be able to have gainful, substantial employment. I have seen a LOT of fakes and frauds in my time, but YOU are not one of them! I will do whatever I have to do to get that point across to them." I already had the rest of the letter filled out, and marked the box where my doctor said I could NOT return to work and dropped it in the mailbox.

Turns out, per my latest MRI's, that my condition has gotten worse. Just in my thoracic and lumbar spine, I have 8 or 9 bulging disks, most with nerve root impingement, and 2 in my thoracic spine that are deforming my spinal cord. That doesn't even include the syrinx in my cervical spine, which runs from about the T-3 level through C-1. The condition is called "Syringomyelia". There are 3 kinds: Congenital, Trauma Induced, and Idiopathic. Mine is Trauma Induced.

Syringomyelia: http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/syringomyelia/detail_syringomyelia.htm This article only mentions the Congenital and Trauma Induced....

Peace,

Ghost

P.S.: I can remember when down in Florida, you could get disability just for being an alcoholic, a drug addict, or if you had a tattoo on your face that made you unemployable. I think that they have fixed that since then...

[SheilaT]

173. I used to work for an attorney who did

SSI and SSDI appeals. You only needed to be turned down once for her to take your case, but she had to be convinced that you'd probably be approved.

The essential problem is that many people do not fully understand just how much documentation is needed, and how serious they are about you can't work at anything to be approved. If you can do similar work, and there are such jobs out there, you won't be approved.

If you go blind you will absolutely be approved first go around. If you are over fifty there's less of a presumption you can do other work. If you are under fifty, the general assumption is you can and should train for something else.

[ProfessorGAC]

162. My Wife's Took 19 Months

So, that's clearly in the ballpark with what you're saying.

[Katashi_itto]

8. K&R

[redwitch]

9. k and r

[Carfuffle]

16. Thoughts on this

1. if we continue to put money in the Gofundme account, would it eventually resolve the problem with WePay? Is there some other way to fix the problem with WePay?

2. I have issues with paypal back from 1996 that I've never resolved. Anyone know of any other way to get money to him with a debit card?

I do like the ideas mentioned of dividing up his regular bills between us or the grocery store gift card. Both of those would outfox the extra fees that get added into contributions.

My Mom used to work for social security disability as an adjudicator. She told many nightmare stories about waiting times and hurdles trying to get people enrolled in it and that was 20 years ago. I'm sure it hasn't gotten any better.

[marym625]

25. I have no idea what bank he uses

But I know with Chase, you can send money to another chase account, without a fee to either party, just by using an email address.

[ColesCountyDem]

81. Hi! I just saw this.

I use US Bank and one person was able to transfer funds directly to my account. I'm still desperately short, having received $245 from this appeal last week.

[annabanana]

18. kick.. .if you want to send something,

use paypal and the email address.. Don't follow the fundme link in the OP

[L0oniX]

19. ...and the sociopths in our gov want to see SSDI go down the drain by 2016.

Remove the cap = problem solved.

[7962]

20. +1 REMOVE THE CAP!!!

[DFW]

21. Anyone got a name and street address?

I have sent things directly to people before. It's about the only way I do this.

[SheilaT]

24. k & r for visibility

on a slow Sunday.

[zappaman]

27. Kick for finally coming clean!

Last edited Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:02 PM - Edit history (1)

Truth.

[grasswire]

35. shame on you

....and the other poster too.

[TheBlackAdder]

101. If true, people who are politically active should know this, as it could be used against a campaign.

.


Full disclosure should be made, or private IMs sent to inquire.

Some people might work on campaigns, run in them, have a relative run in one, or plan to do so in the future.
A DOXing of one's bank accounts could reveal such fund transfers.


This information could negatively impact a candidate or someone closely associated with politics.


=


Remember: This is a political website, folks here are generally politically active in one sense or another.


.

[840high]

55. Why was that post hidden?

[zappaman]

61. Beats me.

[merrily]

63. Terms of Service

Respect people's privacy.

Do not post or link to any private/personal information about any person, even if it is publicly available elsewhere on the Internet.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

[840high]

65. Now I know. Thanks.

[Go Vols]

84. Wouldn't that apply to the OP then?

[TheBlackAdder]

102. Full Disclosure is needed. This is a political website, many here are active in campaigns.

.


This information could be DOXed or obtained by internet savy operatives and could jeopardize a candidate now or in the future.


People might have a desire to run, in the future, and this could come back and be used against them.


.

[merrily]

97. Did the OP give a surname and town? Say anything about a crime?

Was the OP alerted on? Also, I assume the OP had permission from the person involved.

[Go Vols]

99. Not that I saw

just personal info.

Do not post or link to any private/personal information about any person

[merrily]

109. Omaha Steve had permission from CCD to post what he posted.

You honestly can't make a distinction between the kind of personal info posted by OS with CCD's permission and the kind of info in the hidden post. made without permission?

[prayin4rain]

111. The OP opened the door to the informational post. If you give permission

for someone to publically solicit money from donors, you give permission for others to inform would be donors that they'd be donating to pedophiles. It's completely unfair to ask for donations then censor the donor's information about the cause to which they're donating. It's almost fraudulent.

[merrily]

113. False. The post got hidden because it violates TOS. Posting to ask for money for a DUer

is not giving anyone permission to violate the TOS, nor does the OP have the authority to give permission to violate the TOS.

You understand that OS asked for the donations, without knowing anything about what dofus posted and then 7 jurors made a determination of dofus's post, which violated terms of service. We don't know who alerted. You're posting as though the same person requested the donations and then alerted on and hid dofus's post all by himself. That cannot happen.

Even though it seems that both you and Dofus post very infrequently, you both should know that much, and know the TOS.

[prayin4rain]

114. Point is, in light of the circumstances (asking for money)

giving information on the cause asked to be donated to, should not violate the TOS in that circumstance. There's a strong policy argument that the TOS should apply differently in cases where donations are being solicited.

[merrily]

115. Take that up with the owner of the board. He wrote the TOS. The OP did not.

Neither did I.

Post in Ask The Administrators.

[prayin4rain]

116. I'm not complaining about the TOS. I'm complaining

about how it was interpreted. If I knew who the jury members were and could change their vote, I would plead my case to them. But, alas.

[MADem]

153. I don't think the TOS has a problem with shit in the newspaper--that's not "private."

Stuff from facebook, or myspace, or reddit, though....that's a different story. Doxxing is very different than passing on something that is published in the paper.

[prayin4rain]

154. Yep, good point. n/t

[Omaha Steve]

157. Seems the person that had the post hidden doesn't agree with you

From Thursday. That is a DU public file. Seems he can dish it out and not take it. Notice the I'm a victim slant.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

I have no idea why OmahaSteve put a link to my profile, as I have not even posted in this particular thread. I believe this may be a violation of ToS.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Aug 6, 2015, 09:34 AM, and voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

[MADem]

159. It's not against the TOS to link to a published newspaper. If it were, then we couldn't post

much of anything here.

Sometimes, it's possible for an alerter to phrase things in such a way that a jury will buy it.

If people were linking to this guy's facebook page, or instagram, or some little blog of rumors, that's one thing. Linking to a newspaper, though?

Not the same at all.

[Omaha Steve]

160. The person that got locked dofus you were talking about doesn't agree with you

He didn't like his own DU profile being posted on the DU and cried TOS.

[davidpdx]

121. No, but another one down thread did

Still waiting for the results, but I'm pretty sure I know which way it will go.

[merrily]

122. Another post by the OP? or a post by another poster?

[davidpdx]

123. Another poster

I'll only say it was similar to the ones that have already been hidden.

[davidpdx]

124. Post #120

The call:

On Sun Aug 9, 2015, 08:42 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Holy fucking wow
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7058519

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Personal attack against another member

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Aug 9, 2015, 09:24 AM, and the Jury voted 6-1 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Hiding not because of the personal attack against another member, but because of the comment saying that DU allows and support pedophiles. People are free to give to this person as they wish, but it appears that most people have stopped their contributions based upon what was revealed. To broadbrush the rest of DU with these statements is worthy of a hide.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If the person Omaha Steve is raising money for is a convicted pedophile, that is fucking hell of alot worse than someone making a public note of that fact.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: WTF, indeed. HIDE!
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I see no proof and even IF it is true, this person is trying to straighten out their life. No need to be mean about it.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[merrily]

125. Thanks. There are quite a few like that on this thread, some hidden, some not.

[Omaha Steve]

126. Thanks for posting

Last edited Sun Aug 9, 2015, 08:14 AM - Edit history (1)

Edit: #5 is sin free to throw stones I see.

OS

[davidpdx]

129. I was #7

You might want to read what I wrote.

[Omaha Steve]

130. My bad

So sorry. It was early. The dog woke me barking at thunder.

THANK YOU!!!

OS

[Omaha Steve]

138. I too would like to know why a host didn't ask this in private?

[MADem]

152. I think once a person's name is published in the paper, they've lost the right to privacy.

They're a public figure at that point.

If this charge against the person was just innuendo from a facebook page, or a doxxing (here's this guy's address, let's go and mess with him-type thing) it should be hidden. But this is, in essence, a thread about a person who is a public figure.

As for GO FUND ME's, those are usually put out by -- or with the permission of -- the person being helped.

[merrily]

169. The term "public figure" has a legal definition and your use of it is nowhere near the definition.

A public figure is one who actively seeks publicity and then some.

Try googling "First Amendment public figure Pulitzer divorce case."

Also, the terms of service contain no exceptions.

Respect people's privacy.

Do not post or link to any private/personal information about any person, even if it is publicly available elsewhere on the Internet.

However, a terminally ill long time DUer has gotten so much shit over this that it may be worth asking Skinner for clarification, which I will do.

[MADem]

170. Nonsense. You're seriously trying to tell me that we, here, at DU need to REDACT

names of criminals that are published in the newspaper?

What criminal 'actively seeks publicity' - hmmmm?

Seriously--under your twisted logic, we'd have to post articles about

NAME REDACTED Shoots 12 People in Movie Theater
or NAME REDACTED Kills Nine Parishioners in Church


That has NEVER happened here. Newspaper articles are fair game.

Just because a newspaper article is CARRIED on the internet, that is a different thing altogether from a facebook post, a blog post, or a reddit post. Newspapers are print media, even if they migrate to the electronic sphere.

Doxxing is not the same as linking to a newspaper article. Private information would be the guy's facebook page, his PHONE number, his address, where he walks his dog, where his kids go to school, what grocery store he shops at, the make/model/license plate of his car--not a published newspaper report about a crime he committed, and for which he was publicly arrested by the (not private) police.

[CreekDog]

96. No Omaha Steve's post wasn't hidden at all

It seems that one can link to the identity of someone if you are being asked to give them money, but one cannot point out anything a out that ready revealed person.

Basically give money or be quiet

[merrily]

98. The terms of service say what they say.

FYI, I did not write the TOS or serve on that jury, nor was I defending the hide. I simply pointed out the TOS to someone who asked a question. However, had I served on that jury, I would have judged only the post alerted on. The fact that the OP had not been hidden would not have influenced my decision, one way or the other. Moreover, I do see possible differences between the OP and the post hidden. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7056195

[madinmaryland]

167. To me, this is a gray area. If a DUer commits a crime and is convicted, that is public information.

He is also asking someone on DU to ask for donations for other issues. Should we not know where the money is going?

I don't know, but am conflicted.

[merrily]

168. Who is asking someone on DU to ask for donations for other issues?

[Quackers]

128. Dofus

Thank you for taking a hide to provide that info. It means a lot!

840, thanks for the use of your post to reply to Dofus.

[Omaha Steve]

133. Your patting troll like actions on the back is my point

Last edited Sun Aug 9, 2015, 02:32 PM - Edit history (1)

This is a total edit including the title.

The Cavers knew about Bob for months. I didn't know until a few hours after this OP was made. The DUer involved obviously knew and waited for the next time a help Bob post would come up.

Why not email Bob and let him know his secret was known and would become public if a request would be made for help? Why not email me in advance since I had helped Bob in the past?

No this was done in a way to get maximum attention.

I got flak for helping TTW. Then I was critical in April about some questions I had. I got flak for that. After confirming her ID, situation, and more with her permission I caught flak from other DUers for that too.

IF I was trying to hide Bob's past I would not have addressed it in the update in the OP as soon as I got home from a sporting event that afternoon.

Bob could have told me at anytime and didn't. Yes he should have. I'm sure he was afraid I'd act like many other people have in this thread, so he remained silent on it.

After the results of Bob and TTW in the last two weeks, it will be hard for another DUer to ask for help in the future. That is a shame. The DU has had a great record of helping long time DUers down on their luck.

If I haven't cleared the air enough, ask away in public.

OS

[Quackers]

145. Steve, insinuate what you want

I don't really care. When you start soliciting money for someone, you better believe that them being a convicted pedophile is pertainent information that potential donors have a right to know, especially when those potential donors may have been victims of a pedophile or rapist. If your litmus test to determine that I'm a caver is my opposition to donate to a convicted pedophile, then I guess I don't pass what you consider a Democrat to be.

Call me a pessimist, but I have a hard time believing someone is reformed when they set up a gofundme account the same month that they are convicted of a sex crime. if he wasn't a member here, would you be as willing to solicite money for him? It's not our place to have to forgive and forget what he did, it's his place to earn the trust back that he destroyed with his actions. Honestly, I'm surprised that I have to point out how offensive this is when there are members here who have suffered sexual assault and rape. You want to solicite money for him? Fine! But you damn well better believe that people have a right to know who they're giving their money to.

[Omaha Steve]

148. Hide the fact???

First thing people see when they click on this post:

Latest update: I just got home from a World Championship event held in Omaha: http://www.omaha.com/sports/u-s-team-finishes-strong-wins-sixth-world-grand-prix/article_b392bc5c-33c7-11e5-8c68-3f4efe573a38.html I came home to a lot of mail. Most of it about Bob. Most of it supportive.

Marta and I have never put strings on how our donations to charity are to be distributed. I never asked someone on the corner with a cardboard sign if they had a criminal record before deciding if they were worthy. You can usually tell they are hungry.

My dad loved The Salvation Army for the way it treated him when he was in the Army during WWII. I had given to The Salvation Army for years on end. Then I learned their record on the treatment of gays. Especially after the story about them not allowing same sex couples in homeless shelters. They never got another dime..

Bob is recovering. I won't hold his past against him. I don't think Jesus would either.


Most people would see a red flag in an update with the words Bob is recovering and read on. That update was a few hours after Bob's past was posted and has never changed. How is that hiding it?

OS

[Omaha Steve]

156. You mean the term pedo appearing in this post 13 times was easy to miss???

How do you think ANYBODY could have missed the whole story in this thread?

And the person your talking about didn't like his name and DU file being posted in a thread even though there is no TOS rule against posting said file on the DU. Went crying to a jury as the victim. The jury bought it. Can dish it out but can't take it.

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

I have no idea why OmahaSteve put a link to my profile, as I have not even posted in this particular thread. I believe this may be a violation of ToS.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Aug 6, 2015, 09:34 AM, and voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

[Omaha Steve]

161. Well does this meet your approval?

Thought I'd check.Tthe OP and title have undergone a massive change.

[yardwork]

164. Yes.

[MADem]

171. ABSOLUTELY. People who are "public figures" --elected, appointed, or in a position of trust-teachers

or police or day care workers, they could get in some HEAVY SHIT if it came to be known that they donated to someone with these issues, also.

Guilt by association is a real thing. It could make the difference between "Here's your raise," and "We're not renewing your contract with us, there's the door."

Your point about people who have endured trauma is most certainly very valid--that could be hugely upsetting to a person if they knew that a DUer with a reputation came forward asking for money for someone else, and they contributed based on that DUer's reputation, only to find out later that they gave money to someone who brought up memories of past abuse. It's just not right.

Transparency in all things.

[ladyVet]

175. Technically, I don't think the person in question is a pedophile.

From Wiki:

Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger.

Again, Wiki:

Ephebophilia is the primary or exclusive adult sexual interest in mid-to-late adolescents, generally ages 15 to 19.

From the linked newspaper article, it said the children involved were teens. Still wrong, in my eyes, but let's define things correctly.

[Person 2713]

176. Eeeewwww. He is a sex offender that is listed in Illinos as the definition of a criminal

Not a little of a sex offender or a lessor sex offender

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=2009&ChapterID=55

If you notice the law is under 18 and under 18 is the crime . The state doesn't discriminate or lesson the crime regarding teens

[Quackers]

179. This is what I found most disturbing.

From the article:

The investigation began after Charleston police received an anonymous letter that claimed Lewis had been luring young men and boys to his home to get them to do “sexual favors,” according to the records.

Even if they were adults, I take issue with those who would chose to lure and deceive another in order to exploit them for sexual favors.

[MH1]

166. Steve, for what it's worth, I appreciate your efforts to help others.

My only question is:

How do we get more people like you in this world?

[ColesCountyDem]

28. My reply.

I won't correct the errors in the article, because I did plead guilty and do accept responsibility. That said, the State did amend its charges when the evidence did not support the initial charge. I entered an Alford plea to the charges, and the court accepted the plea, which it was not required to do; without objection from the State, I was fined and sentenced to 4 years of probation. I am successfully completing sex-offender-specific treatment, am finalizing my relapse-prevention plan and have put together a support network of people who will help ensure that I do not relapse. I am fully compliant with all laws and conditions of my probation. Perhaps you don't think I've been sufficiently punished, and you're certainly entitled to hold that opinion.

I returned to work after posting bond, and became unemployed when my call center closed, and not because of my conviction; this is why I received unemployment. I am now unemployed because my health will no longer permit me to work, which is why I have applied for disability. In the mean time, I have the same basic needs as anyone else, and I have no way of meeting those needs financially. Perhaps you think I deserve to be homeless, and again, you're certainly entitled to hold that opinion. I don't think that anyone, myself included, deserves to be homeless. Furthermore, becoming homeless will only lessen my chances of living a law-abiding life in the future, a fact that both law-enforcement and mental health professionals concede.

I am trying very hard to make amends for what I did, and to live a decent, respectable life going forward. I would hope that most people would understand this.

Thank you.

[marym625]

30. I can't pretend to understand

But it's very brave of you to even respond to this.

The law punished you and that should be enough for anyone, IMHO

[ColesCountyDem]

31. Thank you, maym625!

I can certainly understand that you don't understand, because I didn't understand it myself, until I went into treatment. If you genuinely commit to treatment, it is unlikely that you will re-offend, and I personally can't possibly think of a reason that anyone would ever want to re-offend.

Thank you for your kind response, marym625-- it helps more than you will ever know.

[marym625]

46. .

[ColesCountyDem]

49. ..

[grasswire]

32. I will be sending a small contribution (best I can do) to you at the end of the week.

Liberals and progressives certainly can support someone in need regardless of that someone's past mistakes. If not us, who? If not now, when?

Show your colors, compassionate people. Offenders of all kinds need community and support in order to keep an even keel.

Kudos to you, Coles County, for your courage shown here, and your compliance with the requirements asked of you.

My very best wishes to you and your family and cats and dog as you go forward.

I'm a DEMOCRAT. I care.

[ColesCountyDem]

34. Thank you, grasswire!

I can't undo the past, and I'm glad you understand that. Your help is appreciated more than you will ever know.

[martalcd]

36. You are absolutely right...

I'm a caring Democrat, and we've given to Bob in the past and will give this time. No one is without their issues, and if we gave based on past problems no one would ever get anything (which is what the Repubnants want to take the US to), because no one is perfect.

Steve and I had made a pledge to give any cash we have to homeless people we pass on the street. With our granddaughter in the car with us on Friday we turned around and went back to a homeless man with a sign. I had a $20 and we handed it to him, and I lectured our grandkid to be kind to everyone. It doesn't make us saps, as I'm sure some people think. I've heard people say you're a sucker for giving a homeless person cash, you're wasting your money, etc. All of that is their justification for thinking of themselves before others. For many years we didn't have the spare money to do this, though we tried to help by driving people somewhere, give them food, and other small things. What we give now is spare cash that we can afford, and if it helps someone it's worth it. The same goes for Bob, and others on the DU that have been in need.

[grasswire]

38. hey, it's Marta!

Feels good to help someone out. It really does. Especially someone that others might not find "deserving" for some cockeyed reason.

[marym625]

47. +1

[Hissyspit]

64. "All of that is their justification for thinking of themselves before others."

Amazing, isn't it?

[Omaha Steve]

80. YES it is

[marym625]

48. +1

[RiverLover]

39. Could you expand, CCD, on what you mean by this?

from your post #28~

Furthermore, becoming homeless will only lessen my chances of living a law-abiding life in the future, a fact that both law-enforcement and mental health professionals concede.

I'm also wondering what your Plan B is if you are turned down for SSDI? I'm not asking to be critical, but because that's a real possibility. Do you have family, friends, a church who could help you?

Also, you didn't mention your pets in the above post, How are they? Do you have any pics? Are they getting enough to eat?

[ColesCountyDem]

43. Certainly.

The laws regarding where you can live are very detailed, so losing a place I've found that complies with all of the restrictions would force me into the street, literally. At that point, I will be required to register every three days, or commit a felony for failing to do so-- no excuses, not even hospitalization accepted. A sex offender cannot stay in a homeless shelter (there are none here, any way), nor can they live in public or Sec. 8 housing. I hope that better explains the urgency of my problem.

As far as there being a Plan B, the answer is basically 'no'. I buried my last family member, my nephew (who I raised, after his father died) on my birthday last June. I do have both friends and a church family, yet both are limited in what they can do, because none of them can house me, which is THE critical issue. If I'm denied, which my lawyer thinks is highly unlikely, I have no idea what I'll do.

My pets are well-- one basset hound (Gilbert) and three kitties (Mama Kitty, Junior and Morris). I use my general-assistance grant to buy them their food, cat litter, flea and heartworm preventative, cleaning supplies and personal-care items. I receive Link (SNAP) benefits for myself, and I budget well, so I'm able to eat 3 meals a day.

Here are my fur kids' pictures:



Gilbert



L-R: Junior, Morris, Mama Kitty

[RiverLover]

44. Awwww, they are absolutely adorable! Thanks so much for posting, and for your thoughtful response.

Its very good to get your true meaning behind the quoted statement, because its a heck of a lot better than what I was thinking you meant! But it also highlights the true direness of all this...

I'm glad your lawyer believes its highly unlikely you'll be denied SS assistance. I'm also glad that your pets are doing so well for the time being. They are always so dependent & helpless in these situations. I'm positive the pics will pull in even more donations.

Stay strong. Wish you well~

RL

[ColesCountyDem]

45. Thank you!

I agree that they're adorable, but I'm prejudiced.

At the time I wrote what I did the first time, it didn't occur to me that it could be read another way, simply because I knew what I meant-- brain cramp.

[KamaAina]

165. You have just succinctly explained what's wrong with sex-offender laws

[daredtowork]

33. SSDI is a scandal and SSI is even more of one

If you look at it from a point of view that you are proving you CAN'T WORK, then the fact it takes YEARS to process these applications (in my case it has been over THREE YEARS, and I have had ups and downs to my situation that would affect my qualification over the course of that time), this situation is a nightmare. It is WORSE THAN THE VA.

People who don't have YEARS OF SAVINGS or a WORKING SPOUSE TO RELY ON must fall back on welfare - which as you can see above is a couple of hundred bucks a month. WELFARE IS NOT ENOUGH FOR RENT, MUCH LESS UTILITIES AND BASIC NECESSITIES. Ever since Clinton's "Reform of Welfare As We Know it" in the 1980s, the only working welfare program is food stamps - that actually pays enough for a modicum of food. Everything else is ABSURDITY!!!!

While you are helping the poor guy above think of every other person in the US in this situation and how crazy-making it is.

Now think how our leading Democratic candidate, the one who will probably get the Democratic nomination - Hillary Clinton - has not stepped up to undo what her husband did to create this situation! Do you think people who are already disabled and sick and applying for SSI/SSDI should be driven into homelessness by this ludicrous crushingly impossibly low welfare system?

If you look at Hillary's welfare policy page, you can see so far she has no plans to address it. She is still dogwhistling on welfare queens by stressing work and childcare while working. No, just no. She needs to get on putting some sort of safety net back in place for people like Bob above.

Bob is not the only one. He is just one of the lucky ones who have found kind friends who will help him.

Ps. I'm surprised the State would let him keep the GoFundMe money on top of the $240/month. Here they would take it away and modify food stamps as well.

[REP]

37. It's not always that bad

My SSDI was approved on the first round over ten years ago. I was fortunate to have private disability insurance to cover my living expenses while I waited through the process (under a year).

Three years ago, the Social Security Administration did make a series of horrible mistakes during my periodic review, including losing all my paperwork. Fortunately I had date-stamped copies and had filed the right forms to be paid while they cleaned up their mess. It ended up going to a hearing, simply because they didn't know what else to do, with the government witnesses testifying on my behalf. The decision was wholly favorable to me, no surprise. A pain in the ass, but it's a game of paperwork.

[daredtowork]

40. I believe it gradually became worse in 2008

The effect was delayed because of extensions in unemployment. Basically, since this country has no welfare safety net, an unusually large amount of people found there was no "floor" for them after unemployment benefits ran out. Some of them that might have contined to work despite disabilty continued to face significant barriers to employment, so they turned to SSDI/SSI as welfare of last resort instead. At the same time, ongoing unemployment for people in the barriers category (which really is being hidden by the Obama administration) combined with epic rent spikes in urban areas has led to an "outbreak" in homelessness. The Obama administration has chosen to deal with this in part by defining the "chronically" homeless as mentally ill - their SSI applications were fast-tracked. This situation created an enormous backlog and an growing attitude in the GOP about SSI especially as stealth welfare: it is now routine to make applicants appeal twice, stretch out the time between steps, and just wait for people to give up- especially if they don't have an advocate. There is a waitlist over a year long to get a free advocate around here: lawyers only take non-complex cases. I couldn't get off the waitlist until I had an extreme health event, and by then I had had to go through the first 2 appeals by myself, using stupid Social Security provided doctors, to meet SS bureaucratic deadlines. The court date backlog has been even longer. Anyway, I think this is all still backwash from 2008 and about the GOP cutting away other options.

[REP]

41. My first approval was in 2004

And I had a rework. At the time, I had 7 disabling conditions. At my hearing last month, their doctor said I have 12. I was well aware that some of them had worsened, but a little surprised they had multiplied.

My hearing had been rescheduled three times: once, because the judge was ill; then because they had been instructed to read the wrong years of my medical file (my medical record runs thousands of pages per year); and finally the third time was a charm ... but I was sick as a dog. Went anyway.

[daredtowork]

42. Perhaps congrats is the wrong word

But I'm glad you got in before people were stuck between a rocky backlog and a "lack of welfare safety net" place like they are now.

[dsc]

54. To blame Clinton for the amount of cash aid is flat out dishonest

My parents were on welfare for a time in the 1980's, incase you are unsure that would be before Clinton, and the amount we got then was just as bad as it is now. And no, I didn't live in Arkansas. Welfare reform had nothing at all to do with the amounts given out. It did limit the time frames. I know that people here like to blame the Clintons for literally everything on earth, but that doesn't make it true.

[daredtowork]

57. It sounds like your parents got TANF

Just because you benefited from "family oriented" politics, don't project that on all the individuals who got the rug pulled out from under them by "welfare reform". BY CLINTON.

[dsc]

67. you miss my point

I was on this before Clinton, and my point is we got just a small an amount then as he is getting now. In other words, the amount didn't fall. We did more in total as we were a family and not a single person, but a single person back then would have gotten a similar amount to a single person now. That is my point. Yes Clinton put a limit on it in terms of time but he didn't put a limit on it in terms of amount nor did he cut the amount.

[daredtowork]

69. The specific amounts are set by County

I've been told that where I am the cuts to the State that led to cuts to the county that led to individuals getting ZERO in direct cash (money going to vendors instead) started during the Clinton area. This creates difficulty when you try to explain your situation to older doctors or other elements of the social system who expect you to buy stuff and expect you to put it on a "budget". Apparently this "budget" was an aspect of an older version of welfare.

[Gormy Cuss]

85. Actually, pre-Clinton it would have been AFDC.

TANF is the name for the family assistance program after the welfare deform of the Clinton era.

Adults without dependents didn't qualify for AFDC and they don't qualify for TANF. The name for welfare for these adults is General Assistance, with local variants on the name like general aid and general relief.

[merrily]

108. At one time, it was called home relief, I think. HR were the initials anyway.

[Gormy Cuss]

119. Yes, there were lots of local variants for general assistance

just as now there are lots of local (state) names for welfare and food assistance.

[merrily]

60. Limiting time frames for those who are permanently disabled and waiting for SSDI

to finish its process makes no sense.

Someone on this thread says the limit is one year, but I am not sure that is so for SSI.

[dsc]

66. I agree the limit is bad

and yes Clinton is to blame for that, though I think it is five not one. But the amount didn't fall which is my point.

[daredtowork]

87. The amount did fall

It is variable by county (I think changed to "block grant"?) and may not involve any direct cash aid at al. General Assistance in Oakland is diferent fro General Assistance in San Francisco. In Oakland it's supposed to go directly to the landlord/vendor, though this just changed last year. I'm not sure how it works in San Francisco, but I'm fairly certain they try to avoid cash aid as well. In Oakland GA is a loan. In San Fracisco they only seek to recover it if you go onto another program that covers the same time period like SSI/SSDI.

[Adrahil]

50. Everyone deserves a chance

Good luck. And stick to treatment.

[ColesCountyDem]

52. I have, and thanks!

My exit evaluation rated me as 'unlikely to re-offend' and 'not sexually dangerous or violent'. Those are good things.

[Tipperary]

131. I am curious about this statement because it seems oddly impersonal as though you have no control

over your actions.

"My exit evaluation rated me as 'unlikely to re-offend' and 'not sexually dangerous or violent'. Those are good things."



I think it would be more reassuring to hear a person convicted of this crime to say, "I know I will never do this again."

[dsc]

158. I am no expert on this

but I am in recovery for alcohol. I haven't had a drink since April of 2000 but I would never, not ever, say I am never going to have a drink again. I would say I won't drink today. I would be more concerned, not less, with a person saying I know I will never do x again.

[roody]

51. k

[ColesCountyDem]

70. I want to thank everyone who has contributed.

Thank you all very much! A big thank to Omaha Steve, too, for posting this.

Love you all!

[Omaha Steve]

71. .

[spanone]

73. k&r...

good luck bob

[Omaha Steve]

75. Thanks

[ColesCountyDem]

82. Thank you! n/t

[Moosepoop]

83. kick! n/t

[ColesCountyDem]

86. Thank you, Moosepoop! I'm still much below goal, and appreciate the visibility.

I appreciate the kick.

[LeftyMom]

91. There are a lot of suffering people in the world, and most of them aren't convicted pedos.

WHY are people's presumably limited resources being directed to this loathsome person, who by rights should be enjoying the hospitality of the state pen?

This is fucked up

edit: And for that matter, isn't it generally required that people in treatment for said vomit-inducing behavior stay off of the internet?

[Tipperary]

92. I too, thought staying off the internet was a restriction in all these cases.

It is kind of amazing to me that this person has the chutzpah to come in any website, much less this one, to ask for money. I do not like pedophiles and I disagree with the op's assertion that it is somehow "ok" because his crime involved young teens rather than younger children. I intend to trash this thread now because this is making me nauseated.

[LexVegas]

93. Thank you. nt

[Adrahil]

95. That's true, does that mean someone trying to get a fresh start doesn't deserve a chance?

I mean, I am disturbed by his crime, but unless you believe he is irredeemable, doesn't he deserve a chance? I'm not suggesting you send you kid on a camp out with him, but helping him get a new start?

[prayin4rain]

103. Agreed. I've barely been back since seeing this.

Now we're expected to not judge people who hurt children. Wtf? And the poster who tried to warn people they'd be donating to a pedo, had their post hidden? ? Then the pedo says, essentially, I'll be less likely to hurt children in the future if I get donations now. And all of it stands? ?! This board is simply too nutty for me sometimes.

[Codeine]

104. In my opinion CCD literally attempted to blackmail DU with that post.

Fucking bizarre.

It's tolerating shit like this that makes people think we're kooks.

[prayin4rain]

105. Yep, maintaing a thread to financially support a grown capable

Last edited Sat Aug 8, 2015, 06:43 PM - Edit history (1)

white man who needs money because he is selfish enough to hurt children for his own sexual gratification is unfuckingbelievable. This place has officially gone off the rails.

[merrily]

112. OS did not have that info until dofus

posted. Dofus's post got hidden for revealing that info, and now you're not only repeating it but falsely accusing OS.

[prayin4rain]

117. Now he knows. Did he delete?

[merrily]

118. /ignore.

You seem to have more of a grudge against the OP than anything else.

[Tipperary]

132. I understood that OS did know because of the way the op is worded. He clearly speaks of not judging

those in need of help. It seems obvious that he was aware of the issue. I am not judging the op at all because I think he means well but I personally would not donate to this. I find this crime to be repellent and unfortunately have personal knowledge of children who have been victimized in this manner. The op feels differently and that is fine but I am not buying that he did not know about the conviction.

[Omaha Steve]

134. My apology

Intent misunderstood after a rash of nasty posts.

OS

[Tipperary]

135. I am a fairly new poster here although a long time lurker. I think it is probably against the rules

to call someone a troll. You could have explained to me that it was a later edit in polite terms instead of attacking me and calling me names. I see that you have had posts hidden recently so I suppose that means calling names at fellow du members is not uncommon for you? I suppose anyone who disagrees with you is a troll? That seems a bit ridiculous. Do you react this way to persons who disagree with you in real life also? As far as my life, I have never been arrested, much less convicted of a crime. I think child molesters belong in one of the lower circles of hell personally. You are friends with one and that is fine but there was no reason to call me names. I have the right to my opinion and I even stated I thought your heart was in the right place. But you do not seem like a nice person so I will have to change my mind. I comprehend just fine and even more so after your personal attack. How rude.

[Omaha Steve]

136. I'll edit

[Tipperary]

137. I accept your apology. I did not know to look for an edit indication.

I have strong feelings about this subject but I meant no insult to you as a person simply standing up for a friend. I am sure I would do the same though I would have difficulty in understanding this particular offense.

[merrily]

140. You misunderstood.

Not donating for whatever reason is your prerogative.

If you want to imply that a trusted DUer like OS lied to me about what OS knew when he started this OP, and/or that I am lying to you, that is also your prerogative. Not thinking much of that is my prerogative. And if OS did know and still had compassion, more power to him. Personally, though, I'd take OS's word over a bunch of posters I've never seen before any day of the week and twice on Sundays--and today is Sunday.

[Tipperary]

142. Omaha Steve spoke to me through pm and he apologized to me for any misunderstanding. I think that

says a lot for his character and I respect that. I will also apologize for my misunderstanding. I am the first to admit that I did not get the edit thing. I did not know anything about that being right there visible on the post even though I have used edit myself for typos. Again, I do apologize and I did say in my original post that I thought he had done nothing wrong in standing up for a friend. I have strong feelings about this particular subject because of personal experience but I also value friendship and loyalty. Bob is lucky to have such a good friend. I intend to bow out of this discussion now.

[merrily]

143. Apology more than accepted.

If you look at the bottom of the OP, you will see that Omaha Steve, a treasure of DU, IMO, is terminal. That may put my instincts in higher gear. Also, too many posters on this thread whose names I do not recognize seemed to be gunning for him as much or more than they were gunning for Coles County Dem. So, if I over-reacted, I apologize as well.

[Tipperary]

144. I thank you for your response. As I mentioned, I am new here, however I have lurked enough to know

that emotions run high here, especially in divisive issues. I came on to the DU simply to listen to others and to speak my opinion. But I really am only interested in the political stories. Unfortunately, I allowed myself to read and become interested in a couple of these Go Fund things. That was silly of me because everyone has a right to help out as they feel is needed.

[Starry Messenger]

110. +1000

[JTFrog]

141. And yet DU loses it's collective mind over a woman and her dog needing help.

Meanwhile this guy gets $7k.

Baffling.

[Omaha Steve]

149. TTW raised $ long before she had a gofundme page total of $2,426

There was resistance to giving to her PayPal from many DUers. She didn't start gofundme until April. She also got $ through PayPal & Western Union (for her I need cash now, not after it clears in 3 days) AFTER her gofundme page went up.

[JTFrog]

150. That doesn't negate my post.

There was a swarm of DUer's who lost their minds and threw out disgusting accusations and turned a plea of help from a woman on the verge of homelessness into a damn witch hunt.

And yet...... here is this thread supported by some of the same folks, and one horribly nasty DUer in particular, who went heartily after TTW.

Just sayin...

[LanternWaste]

163. I like to call people who disagree with my opinion a 'swarm' too.

I like to call people who disagree with my opinion a 'swarm' too. Makes them appear so much more sinister and wicked than reality supports, so we can better pretend we're on the high road when we practice the same thing we indict others for.

Just sayin'..., part 2

[JTFrog]

172. What the fuck?

Whatever.

[sagat]

174. +1

[LexVegas]

94. This thread is extremely extremely disturbing. nt

[Orrex]

139. Could someone post the GoFundMe where we donate for Bill Cosby?

Thanks.

[JTFrog]

151. Don't give them any ideas. n/t

[Person 2713]

177. Drugs, burglary, shit all kinds of crime but this I can not rec

Do you know why they have a registary for this particular crime in Illinois ?
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=2009&ChapterID=55

[NuclearDem]

178. "Do you know why they have a registary for this particular crime in Illinois ?"

Because kneejerk reactions to tragedies ended up creating policies that don't fucking work and make the problem worse.

Publicly available sex offender registries are a fucking stupid idea.

[DrDan]

180. I think they are a great idea

I have a granddaughter who visits overnight frequently - and she lives a couple of miles away.

I appreciate knowing, as do her parents, where the sex offenders live nearby. I appreciate knowing when one moves close.

[NuclearDem]

181. Your granddaughter is more likely to be killed by a drunk driver

then molested by a registered sex offender.

Guess we should start registering everyone convicted of a DUI.

[DrDan]

183. not the same . . . but you know that

I appreciate that bit of knowledge (where they live) and will continue to subscribe. If I can be a bit more aware of our environment in the interest of my granddaugher's safety, I will.

It is not a matter of statistics, after all.

[NuclearDem]

185. I don't know where you live, but here in Indiana

sex offender recidivism is 12%--that's for all crimes. 2% of that 12% are for new sex offenses--the other 98% are for drug dealing and property crimes in large part due to their inability to find work.

Yes, it is a matter of statistics. The registry doesn't work.

[DrDan]

188. perhaps in your world it is - but in the interest of my granddaughter's safety, it isn't

If a convicted sex offender lives in my neighborhood, I would like to know.

I will continue to subscribe.

[Person 2713]

184. It is a crime with high repeat offenses harming minors who can not defend themselves

repeats and this guy is ,often do what they do because of a compulsion -- a drive that makes them seek out victims in the same way over and over. If you live two doors down from a known serial rapist, and you fit his victim profile, then you should be afraid and take precautions. That compulsion is why we have a sex offender registry and not a murder registry.

Serial killers to avoid another reply yes it is compulsion but let's be honest by the time they are found out too late to identify alone to help and their number few

[NuclearDem]

187. If someone was convicted of a series of premeditated rapes

(which is what a serial rapist does) they would be in prison, not in the community, because they would be deemed far too much of a risk to be set free.

It is a crime with high repeat offenses harming minors who can not defend themselves

No, it's not. Sex offender recidivism is astronomically low. You're confusing sex offenses with burglary.

[Person 2713]

182. I was able to find out Illinois state police have him 3 times 1/13 2/13 & 9/14

The registration is due to high repeats that was my intention of that question
because that is why the registration exists

I am myself are happy they exist but as I said yesterday I am new and still learning DUs demographics . Everyone has their opinion. . Illinois police have him listed as a sexual predator. There is a sex offender category too
People are on here saying those people can't think of others. no I can not support someone who has done that three times no was caught three times in a crime involving minors that has an exceptional high repeat that I do not know . I guess I am thinking of the minors but the vibe I am getting is I will be mocked for that
The OP was allowed to ask for donations so I should be able to reply why I won't give
If they have done you wrong personally you should work with an attorney to get it expunged

[Omaha Steve]

186. I have no problem with you expressing your opinion

OS