GUILTY MI - Daniel Sorensen, 26, beheaded & burned, Northville, 7 Nov 2007

[SewingDeb]

I agree Misty.

 

[RWill1974]

This whole sex offender thing needs reform BIG TIME. Nowadays almost any innocuous thing can get ANYONE labeled a sex offender. We are way too reactive in this society. When a certain crime is committed (i.e the rape and murder of Megan Kanka in NJ) we react by going WAY overboard. I understand completely about protecting children from people that may do them harm but this Megan's Law has gone too far in including many people who never harmed a child or most likely never would. To society at large there is no distinction regarding what you were convicted of when you carry a sex offender status. I'm sorry, it just really pi$$es me off. God forbid some "innocent little child" wants to be vindictive against an adult by lying and saying he or she molested him or her, odds are you are screwed no matter what, regardless of whether you did anything or not. There's no freakin' common sense anymore.

 

[imthemom]

This whole sex offender thing needs reform BIG TIME. Nowadays almost any innocuous thing can get ANYONE labeled a sex offender. We are way too reactive in this society. When a certain crime is committed (i.e the rape and murder of Megan Kanka in NJ) we react by going WAY overboard. I understand completely about protecting children from people that may do them harm but this Megan's Law has gone too far in including many people who never harmed a child or most likely never would. To society at large there is no distinction regarding what you were convicted of when you carry a sex offender status. I'm sorry, it just really pi$$es me off. God forbid some "innocent little child" wants to be vindictive against an adult by lying and saying he or she molested him or her, odds are you are screwed no matter what, regardless of whether you did anything or not. There's no freakin' common sense anymore.

I recently seen an episode of CSI where they pulled in a sex offender for questioning. He was living under an assumed name because he couldn't get work or a place to live. They interogated him and then found out he was innocent. He had had to register as a sex offender because in college he got drunk and ran outside naked. It ruined his life. I know it is a story line but it is true for many out there that have been lumped into this group.

 

[RWill1974]

I recently seen an episode of CSI where they pulled in a sex offender for questioning. He was living under an assumed name because he couldn't get work or a place to live. They interogated him and then found out he was innocent. He had had to register as a sex offender because in college he got drunk and ran outside naked. It ruined his life. I know it is a story line but it is true for many out there that have been lumped into this group.

Yeah, it's so ridiculous, imthemom. I'm sure stuff like the events depicted in that episode of CSI happen all the time.

I mean, I agree with a lot of people that children are our most vulnerable members of this society and they should be protected from the evils that lurk out there. But at the same time, I was a kid once, and I learned then that a lot of kids are douche bags. I remember some kids being dishonest, cruel little bastids. In today's society, if a kid accuses an adult of a heinous crime like molesting him or her, that adult is screwed no matter what. Especially once the press gets ahold of it. And God forbid that stupid clownface Nancy Grace features it on her show! That woman has you convicted even before you go to trial, even before all the facts of the case are in! I despise that woman, phony vulture that she is!

 

[pixies]

I recently seen an episode of CSI where they pulled in a sex offender for questioning. He was living under an assumed name because he couldn't get work or a place to live. They interogated him and then found out he was innocent. He had had to register as a sex offender because in college he got drunk and ran outside naked. It ruined his life. I know it is a story line but it is true for many out there that have been lumped into this group.

I agree, the law should be be fixed. Running naked in public ..erm, I dunno. If my kids seen a naked man running down the road I would be pretty pissed off...but should he go on the list? NO. Rapists and ALL child molesters should be on the list. Prostitutes? Nope. Flashers? Yep.
That is my opinion anyways.

 

[kgeaux]

I recently seen an episode of CSI where they pulled in a sex offender for questioning. He was living under an assumed name because he couldn't get work or a place to live. They interogated him and then found out he was innocent. He had had to register as a sex offender because in college he got drunk and ran outside naked. It ruined his life. I know it is a story line but it is true for many out there that have been lumped into this group.

A woman I've met has a son in his early thirties who has to register as a sex offender. He posted photos of his teenaged wife online......she was old enough to marry with the permission of her parents, but the photos were consider child because of her age. She had posed willingly and helped to set up the webpage that hosted the photos. He ended up in the federal pen, she grew up and got lonely and divorced him, but not until they'd brought a little baby into the world.

These two were stupid, granted. But the son hasn't ever molested a child and will be labeled a sex offender for his whole life long. He will never be alone with his child, he will probably never have more than a blue collar job.

Sometimes the label isn't warrented, IMO.

 

[RWill1974]

A woman I've met has a son in his early thirties who has to register as a sex offender. He posted photos of his teenaged wife online......she was old enough to marry with the permission of her parents, but the photos were consider child because of her age. She had posed willingly and helped to set up the webpage that hosted the photos. He ended up in the federal pen, she grew up and got lonely and divorced him, but not until they'd brought a little baby into the world.

These two were stupid, granted. But the son hasn't ever molested a child and will be labeled a sex offender for his whole life long. He will never be alone with his child, he will probably never have more than a blue collar job.

Sometimes the label isn't warrented, IMO.

Wow, kgeaux, that's terribly sad! Guy's life is ruined now and for what?! Just so society can make themselves feel all high and mighty "defending" poor innocent children around the world? I truly despise self-righteous people. It's like 'get a life and shut the hell up.' These are the kinds of people who make snap judgements without knowing all the facts. These people just like to be the first heard and in their heads they're wishing other will be like "damn, that's one who speaks their mind!" People like that air-head Nancy Grace and her little lemmings that call in to her show.

 

[chicoliving]

DETROIT — A teenager convicted of killing a man, then beheading him and setting fire to his body in what prosecutors called a thrill killing was sentenced Monday to life in prison without parole.

Jean Pierre Orlewicz, 18, didn't speak before being sentenced to the mandatory term.
"I am grateful that you are going away for the rest of your life, because in my view I believe you will kill again," Wayne County Circuit Court Judge Annette Berry said.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,355176,00.html

 

[mydnyght]

okay I'm interested in doing a case study of JP Orlewicz and I'm looking for information and details of his life childhood and about his psychological make up if anyone has or knows where I can find this information I would be grateful

 

[Lady Loves Lurking]

They don't play in Detroit.

 

[Jersey*Girl]

I can't believe how many of you can sit here and applaud this man's death when you don't even know the circumstances of his charges.

Neither do I. I also agree that his murder was probably unrelated to his SO status - looks like someone was trying to stop the identification of his body.

My prayers for his family and for everyone affected by this brutal crime.

I couldn't agree more - when people are labeled SOs for something like that, it only serves to make the whole SO status thing meaningless.

This whole sex offender thing needs reform BIG TIME. Nowadays almost any innocuous thing can get ANYONE labeled a sex offender. We are way too reactive in this society. When a certain crime is committed (i.e the rape and murder of Megan Kanka in NJ) we react by going WAY overboard. I understand completely about protecting children from people that may do them harm but this Megan's Law has gone too far in including many people who never harmed a child or most likely never would. To society at large there is no distinction regarding what you were convicted of when you carry a sex offender status. I'm sorry, it just really pi$$es me off. God forbid some "innocent little child" wants to be vindictive against an adult by lying and saying he or she molested him or her, odds are you are screwed no matter what, regardless of whether you did anything or not. There's no freakin' common sense anymore.

I agree with everything quoted in this post. This sex offender thing definitely needs an overhaul...especially in Florida! Words cannot express how much I despise somebody getting an offender rap b/c a 14 y/o girl in hs dated a 17 or 18 y/o and ended up having sex with them! I remember being in 10th grade and bragging about going out with a freshman in college...man I thought I was hot stuff! I personally think if rape isn't involved, meaning non-consensual, then parents should not have the priviledge of pressing charges (only pertaining to close in range ages)...especially knowing that it will take a few years to go to court and the kid could be tried as an adult! Alot of courts use this to coven money from the fed. They tend to wait until the perp is over a certain age and then put in their docs they are a certain age and abusing another from a lesser age range...they give the specific age for the proposed perp, however, they give a range of 12-17 for the victim...so technically the perp could have been 17 when they had a relationship with a 14 y/o but it took so long for court to come so their age is then listed as older but the victim stays within the same range. People's eyes tend to go right to the 12 in the range but the vic would have been 14, therefore 17 when the perp is convicted - so they would still be within that range and it makes the perp look even more guilty. What a sad game this is to play...very sad indeed. For all of you naysayers, I plead with you all to research what I'm talking about. Trust me, I'm a freak about offenders...but I despise the fact that some of these offenders shouldn't really be classified as offenders.

I found this article & thought it was interesting:
http://lostinlimaohio.blogspot.com/2007/11/daniel-gene-vincent-sorensen.html
So, it looks like Daniel was 17 & from Ohio. He met somebody on the internet & began a relationship with her - she was 14 and from Illinois. Each state has different laws, so I'm thinking that came into play with regards to his conviction. Here's a snippet from the article: According to the father, the 2000 conviction was over a relationship he'd had when he was 17 (meaning it took around 3 years to make it from criminal act to a conviction): Jim Sorensen said the sex offender conviction occurred when his son was 17 and dating a 14-year-old girl that he met on the Internet. Daniel Sorenson thought the girl was 16 and went to Illinois to meet her. I have also found that he was stabbed to death before he was decapitated. What the hell is wrong with people? May peace be with his family, as well as the girl's family for pressing charges on him in the first place...they have to live with this forever.

Something for everyone to think about: I personally know somebody that lives down the street from me, he was accused of patting his granddaughter on the hiney. His step-daughter was kicked out of their home for various reasons, drugs among those reasons, and she devised this plan that she could sue for the house and mental damages to her daughter (since her mom & step-dad had custody of her daughter - a teenager mind you). DYFS became involved and it took almost a year to get them in court. The step-daughter admitted under oathe that she lied (this is a freaking 40 y/o woman) and her daughter was then allowed to move back in with her grandparents. Her mother lost all visitation priviledges and I believe is still serving probation. She flippin' got probation and a shadow hovers over this guys head til this day! Also, the gorgeous granddaughter that they raised lost almost a year of her innocent childhood b/c her mom had to be an a$$! I know these people and they are truly good folks. The son owned a carpet business in our town that went under b/c people stopped buying from him b/c of the suspicions surrounding his father. The other son stopped visiting his dad as much b/c his wife was worried about the allegations as they have a son & daughter, too. Now they're making up for lost time, but it'll always be in the back of the innocent man's head. It is situations like this which make me feel as though the person wrongly accusing somebody of a sex offense should acquire the maximum penalty. Perjurers in court have harsher penalties than what this accuser got - freaking probation...absolutely unbelievable!

Hugs to you all,

Jersey

 

[impatientredhead]

Totally agree with the sex offender label being revamped. As with most things in society we go from one extreme to the other. It use to be a taboo subject and charges related to anything sexual where couched under something else. Victims discouraged from testifying etc...

But now the pendulum has swung so far in the other direction that the wide spread mandatory use of the label "sex offender" has made the registries far less useful than they should/could be. People's lives are being destroyed over due to being labeled when they are no threat to society. And we are on the way to "sex offender" not having any real effect on people and motivating them to take extra precautions with their children around "sex offenders".

The registries fill with streakers and teen romances and people hear more and more about all the people who shouldn't be on there.... the real predators will be able to explain away their name being there. How many people do you know that wouldn't take the time to verify the story, do the research, look up the statute they violated?

Completely defeats the purpose and intent of the registry. I personally want to know that if I find my neighbor listed that he/she is there because we have made a sound and rational judgement that we believe this person to be a THREAT to those unable to protect themselves and therefore we need to increase our vigilance. Now of course that leads me off on another tangent about why in the world we let people that we have made sound and rational judgements to be a threat to the vulnerable walk among us, but I will save it.

 

[Kat]

DETROIT — A teenager convicted of killing a man, then beheading him and setting fire to his body in what prosecutors called a thrill killing was sentenced Monday to life in prison without parole.

Jean Pierre Orlewicz, 18, didn't speak before being sentenced to the mandatory term.
"I am grateful that you are going away for the rest of your life, because in my view I believe you will kill again," Wayne County Circuit Court Judge Annette Berry said.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,355176,00.html

http://www.freep.com/article/20090518/NEWS02/90518090/Judge+s+blunder+could+spread+to+Orlewicz+case

May 18, 2009

...In April, the Michigan Court of Appeals granted a new trial for Michael Wade after finding that Wayne County Circuit Judge Annette Berry incorrectly failed to include the words “not guilty” as a choice for the jury on the verdict form.

Now an appellate lawyer for Orlewicz, who was already fighting for a new trial, contends the judge made the same mistake in the 2008 trial in which the Plymouth Township teen was convicted of first-degree murder...

Looks like this one is going to drag out.

 

[ohiogirl]

I understand defense attorneys have to appeal on the least little detail, but I truly believe the outcome will be the same. Won't make any difference, retrial or not.

 

[RayStar]

Well this little bad mouth killer was granted a new trial today. Update at www.detnews.com.

 

[noctilucent]

Stumbled over this thread and was curious about what happened with the new trial.

In December 2009 (as RayStar mentioned) Orlewicz was granted a new trial: http://thenewsherald.com/articles/2009/12/26/none/doc4b365bf3985cd831832284.txt

Wayne County Circuit Judge Bruce Morrow entered an order Tuesday granting a new trial to Jean Pierre Orlewicz, now 19, of Plymouth Township. Morrow ruled that Judge Annette Berry excluded pertinent testimony from Orlewicz's psychiatrists and thereby deprived him of a fair trial.

However, in June 2011 the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld Orlewicz's initial conviction, ruling that there wasn't evidence of any infringement of his rights: http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2011/06/michigan_appeals_court_upholds.html

The opinion released Wednesday also means Jean Pierre Orlewicz of the Detroit area won't get a new trial.