MySpace Gets False Positive In Sex Offender Search

gbulmash writes "In its eagerness to clear sex offenders off its site and publish their identities, MySpace identified an innocent woman as a sex offender. She shares a name and birth month with a sex offender who lives in a neighboring state and that was apparently enough to get MySpace to wrongly brand her and completely ignore her protests."

Comments

Re:It's a good thing, then...

[TheCarp]

You know... I actually find myself having to agree here.

"Sex Offender" can really mean many things. Of course, rapists and child molesters come to mind. However, I have a friend who was in his early 20s, met a girl who claimed she was 18, had her stay with him a few nights, and the next thing he knew the police came knocking at his door.... she was 16, and a friend of hers told her parents where she was.

Eventually they pleaded the case down and he did not end up having to register as a sex offender, but it was clearly possible. I need to check, but I have heard that public exposure can lead to a sex crime conviction... shit... who doesn't know someone who got drunk some night and took a piss in a park or alley way at 3 am? Does a person really deserve to be on a sex offender list for taking a piss against natures original urinal?

I mean there are some truly heinous sex crimes, and some really scary people. However, theres also some really pretty innocuous stuff too. I am not sure I can support lumping them all together.

Re:Can we quit with the whole sex offender thing n

[mschuyler]

Just some FYI. In my state there are three categories of "sex offender." Level Three are those people who are "highly likely to re-offend." They refuse any treatment for their sexual proclivities. They've been caught more than once already. Most of them, frankly, are real nutcases and the kind you'd better be wary of. One look at their mug shot and you'd think Nick Nolte was a sharp dresser.

However, this leads to a catch-22 for those people who are accused, but are innocent. I know of one case (boarder of a mother of a friend), a middle-aged woman, who absolutely insists she is innocent and attributes her troubles to a very nasty ex-husband in a divorce case. She refused treatment on the basis that she was innocent, so not only did she refuse treatment, she showed no remorse. This double whammy shoved her into Level Three, where she not only has to register, but her mug shot is on the county web site for all to see.

Now, I have no idea whether she is "really" innocent. MOST ALL criminals are innocent if you ask them about it. But let's say she WAS innocent. Talk about being between a rock and a hard place. It's like Kafka's "The Trial."

Re:It's a good thing, then...

[cbreaker]

I agree with you.

I work at a prison. It's really showed me how pointless prison is, and how punishments for a lot of things are just too harsh. Capital crimes might get you 20 years, but having an ounce of weed could get you 15. It's completely out of whack.

But the sex offenders "list" goes way beyond serving your sentence. It's like a damned scarlet letter. And let's be realistic: not even a sex offender thinks they'll be caught, so what is some list going to stop someone that intends to re-offend?

What do these lists do besides further punish people that served their sentences in full?

There's got to be a better way.. I say put bracelets on their ankles for 10 years, if you're that worried about it. At least it's not a big sign over your head.