kk's mom
New Member
Interesting article on abcnews.com. I mean, we've read it elsewhere but at least it's being looked at nationally......
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=680670&page=1
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=680670&page=1
kk's mom said:Interesting article on abcnews.com. I mean, we've read it elsewhere but at least it's being looked at nationally......
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=680670&page=1
Well, how much more information did she need?:doh:richandfamous said:I see in that article that Sheriff Gee is comfirming Kelly May Lunde's knowledge of Onstott's past.
"So she knew he had a criminal history, she knew it was involving what he had described to her as date rape, and beyond that, I don't think she had a lot of information," Sheriff David Gee said, referring to Lunde."
I take "low risk to reoffend" to mean the statuatory rapists, those that commit crimes against adults, etc. If we lump them all into the same category, the price tag might be so high that nothing will be done.kk's mom said:There shouldn't even be a category of "low risk to reoffend".
I agree. These people are probably the lowest of the low to betray the trust of the very child(ren) that needed to depend on them. But at the same time, many studies seem to indicate that these perps are not dangerous to society at large. That doesn't make their crimes any less horrible ... they should also be locked up for life. But that is why the distinction exists.Sheromom said:Are other states different? In Washington, they are considered a "low" risk to reoffend as long as they only ruined their own child's life. IMO, that is the WORST imaginable thing that could happen.
I am way behind -- but I totally agree w/ your statement. This "denial" ridden excuse is so pathetic. She should feel LUCKY that nothing happen to her own child, THAT SHE LEFT with a sex offender. AGAIN, what kind of mother does this!!!!!richandfamous said:I suppose ashley poston thinks Sarah brought it on herself!
I also suppose the next thing we hear from her is..."But I love him!"
omg if I hear that one more time, I will scream!
And apparently it's not that uncommon:Nchadwickaz said:I am way behind -- but I totally agree w/ your statement. This "denial" ridden excuse is so pathetic. She should feel LUCKY that nothing happen to her own child, THAT SHE LEFT with a sex offender. AGAIN, what kind of mother does this!!!!!
I am a single-mother of 4 girls -- ages 13, 5, twins 4. I would not think twice about making sure someone that I allowed in my girls life without checking not only legal avenues but also word of mouth. I would not hesitate to cease contact with ANY person that even may have a questionable past (especially w/ the way plea bargains are these days). I know that the piece of crap that actually did this to this poor child is to blame but the mother is also to blame -- she allowed this person near her daughter and when her main responsibility was to protect her, she was no where to be seen.JerseyGirl said:Yahoo! News - Parental supervision key to safety
Parents are more important than the registries, says Nancy McBride, national safety director of the non-profit National Center for Missing & Exploited Children...
McBride and other experts on crimes against children say attackers are far more likely to be known by their victims than they are to be strangers.
"That's why, for instance, when I talk to single mothers I say, 'You've got to check out that boyfriend,' " McBride said. "You need to make sure you know his motivation..."
And some offenders, McBride says, will choose victims from families where they know the parents aren't paying attention to their children's whereabouts and aren't likely to have checked the registries.
"They'll go for the opportunities that allow them to do what they want to do," she said, "and they're going to stay away from situations where they're probably going to get caught."
Unfortunaltly, I know that this kind filth flows from the mouths of some... it is the same sick minds that say "I know he hits me, but it is because he loves me" or "it was consensual" when referring to a 14 year old having sex with a 24 year old.JerseyGirl said:And apparently it's not that uncommon:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=680670&page=1
And Onley said he gets a surprising amount of questions from women who know that their boyfriend is a sex offender, and are looking for information about how to make life easier for him and even let him spend time with their children.
"Some things don't make sense," he said. "Just because someone knows, doesn't mean they would take appropriate action."
We've all known desperate women ... the kind that feel worthless without a man. I don't know what makes people so needy that they would put their children at risk to cling to men like these offenders. But you are absolutely right ... the human mind is capable of justifying just about anything.Nchadwickaz said:I seriously, can't believe that the human mind is able to jusify this kind of crap.
JerseyGirl said:We've all known desperate women ... the kind that feel worthless without a man. I don't know what makes people so needy that they would put their children at risk to cling to men like these offenders. But you are absolutely right ... the human mind is capable of justifying just about anything.