U.S. Marshals Won't Track Violent Escaped Canadian Sex Offender In US

HeySal

11 years ago

International law. They'll watch him. If he causes problems they won't waste time.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8601374].message }}

thunderbird

11 years ago

Correction: Violent rapist Michael Stanley is an American citizen who escaped Canada:
Cross border controversy: Why Canada won't try to extradite convicted American sex offender

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Project HERE.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8612463].message }}

Kay King

11 years ago

They say he is a dangerous sexual predator - but then say he's not wanted for that kind of crime. He served the prison time imposed in Canada and has been monitored for 2 1/2 years and the only charges are breaking his promises and traffic violations.

If he offends in the US, we'll go after him here. I think the story is a bit over-hyped - but that's typical of any news slip with the word "sex" in it.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

Live life like someone left the gate open

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8612949].message }}

thunderbird

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

They say he is a dangerous sexual predator - but then say he's not wanted for that kind of crime. He served the prison time imposed in Canada and has been monitored for 2 1/2 years and the only charges are breaking his promises and traffic violations.

If he offends in the US, we'll go after him here. I think the story is a bit over-hyped - but that's typical of any news slip with the word "sex" in it.

He's considered, "likely to reoffend." It won't be overhyped for the next victim...in the United States.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Project HERE.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8612959].message }}

HeySal

11 years ago

Originally Posted by thunderbird

He's considered, "likely to reoffend." It won't be overhyped for the next victim...in the United States.

Sex offenders always re-offend. It's not a one-time mental disorder thing. There is an exception - - and that is when the offender is a mercenary who was paid to do it. If that is the case, sex offenses are the LEAST of our worries.

There still is the point that he is wanted in one country doesn't mean he's wanted in any other. Canada would have to strike an extradition order for him since he is wanted there and not here. The last time I checked, it's still not okay in America to just pick people up because they are likely to commit a crime. There's a good reason for that. It can be a risk, but it's one we have to take if we want to be a free people. The idea of a guy wandering around that is likely to commit a crime, is much less distasteful to me than the idea that the cops can just go around and pick anyone up because they might commit one........which would make anyone and everyone of us vulnerable.

In the US, as well - a LOT of women carry guns and/or have martial arts training just to handle that type of crime, so if he decides he wants to get funny on us.........he better choose his victim really, really carefully. Americans are becoming very short tempered with criminals.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8613311].message }}

Kay King

11 years ago

Sex offenders always re-offend.

But - there is also the question of how the label is defined.

Sex Offender Statistics | Statistic Brain

When dealing with molesters/pedophiles/serial rapists - the chances of re-offending are extremely high...but the same isn't true of everything we label as "sexual offense".

There are people on the sex offenders list - being tracked for life - who were convicted of acts which are now legal. These were private, consensual acts between two people but were, at the time, against the law.

Some of the registry doesn't make sense. Two teens have sex - and both can end up on the offender list in some states. Are they truly sexual predators? A little common sense could go a long way and we might end up with only those people who need to be closely monitored.

Surprising Things That Could Make You A Sex Offender - Business Insider

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

Live life like someone left the gate open

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8613471].message }}

HeySal

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

But - there is also the question of how the label is defined.

Sex Offender Statistics | Statistic Brain

When dealing with molesters/pedophiles/serial rapists - the chances of re-offending are extremely high...but the same isn't true of everything we label as "sexual offense".

There are people on the sex offenders list - being tracked for life - who were convicted of acts which are now legal. These were private, consensual acts between two people but were, at the time, against the law.

Some of the registry doesn't make sense. Two teens have sex - and both can end up on the offender list in some states. Are they truly sexual predators? A little common sense could go a long way and we might end up with only those people who need to be closely monitored.

Surprising Things That Could Make You A Sex Offender - Business Insider

You're very right about that Kay - but I was speaking about "offender" in the traditional sense of the one party NOT being consensual. I wasn't in the mind that anyone called an offender under our new and "improved" fascist laws are actually harmful. I find the REAL offenders are people who make such laws. I can see a 30 year old doing a 14 year old that consents considered an offender - but two teenagers? It's a travesty to ruin their lives for being experimental - that's ruling on morality, not violent crime.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8613524].message }}

thunderbird

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

But - there is also the question of how the label is defined.

Sex Offender Statistics | Statistic Brain

When dealing with molesters/pedophiles/serial rapists - the chances of re-offending are extremely high...but the same isn't true of everything we label as "sexual offense".

There are people on the sex offenders list - being tracked for life - who were convicted of acts which are now legal. These were private, consensual acts between two people but were, at the time, against the law.

Some of the registry doesn't make sense. Two teens have sex - and both can end up on the offender list in some states. Are they truly sexual predators? A little common sense could go a long way and we might end up with only those people who need to be closely monitored.

Surprising Things That Could Make You A Sex Offender - Business Insider

Where do you think Michael Stanley fits in?

"Stanley, 48, has a long history of violent and sexual offences, some of which have involved abducting children.

He was described in a 2006 court proceeding as having severe anti-social personality and psychopathic tendencies. At the time, he was being sentenced for the assault and unlawful confinement of two mentally challenged boys he'd lured into his apartment. Other convictions include the rape of a wheelchair-bound 80-year-old woman in Lethbridge in 1988. Hayduk said Stanley also has previous convictions from the United States."

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Project HERE.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8613542].message }}

Kay King 11 years ago

I think this guy is the reason we NEED such a list. But we also need to stop giving them get out of jail early cards.

As for his history - I'm not sure what it is. He had two convictions for major crimes and no other crimes/arrests listed. Several stories claim "long history of crimes" but there's nothing to be found online except those two crimes.

Fact is he had a 1988 conviction - don't know how long he served for that. He had a 2006 conviction and was released in 2011 after allowed to receive 2 yrs credit for one served. Maybe it's me but I find the concept that a repeat felon could be expected to follow 20 rules consistently year after year....is unrealistic.

If we want people like this off the street and out of our neighborhoods - we need to keep them in jail or in a mental facility long term. If we aren't willing to do that - they do what they do.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
Live life like someone left the gate open
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8613634].message }}

SteveJohnson

11 years ago

Originally Posted by thunderbird

Where do you think Michael Stanley fits in?

"Stanley, 48, has a long history of violent and sexual offences, some of which have involved abducting children.

He was described in a 2006 court proceeding as having severe anti-social personality and psychopathic tendencies. At the time, he was being sentenced for the assault and unlawful confinement of two mentally challenged boys he'd lured into his apartment. Other convictions include the rape of a wheelchair-bound 80-year-old woman in Lethbridge in 1988. Hayduk said Stanley also has previous convictions from the United States."

If this guy was this bad, why did Canada let him out of jail at all? In 2006 - less than 10 years ago - he was being sentenced for assault and unlawful confinement. Why is he not still in a deep dark Canadian hole somewhere?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

The 2nd Amendment, 1789 - The Original Homeland Security.

Gun control means never having to say, "I missed you."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8616673].message }}

thunderbird

11 years ago

Originally Posted by SteveJohnson

If this guy was this bad, why did Canada let him out of jail at all? In 2006 - less than 10 years ago - he was being sentenced for assault and unlawful confinement. Why is he not still in a deep dark Canadian hole somewhere?

Good question. I wish he was deep in the ground at a hazardous waste dump.

Thanks

Signature

Project HERE.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8617050].message }}

waterotter

11 years ago

Originally Posted by SteveJohnson

If this guy was this bad, why did Canada let him out of jail at all? In 2006 - less than 10 years ago - he was being sentenced for assault and unlawful confinement. Why is he not still in a deep dark Canadian hole somewhere?

His sentence would be right on par for Canada. Our judicial system sucks and is a slap in the face to victims

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8638704].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

You want to see how they REALLY treat sex offenders in the US? REALLY!?!?!?!?

OK.......

The following guy was a ******CONVICTED****** sex offender! WITNESSES informed the cops about Jaycee, and the cops simply went to her rapist to say HI! SERIOUSLY! They went at least once, knocked, talked, and didn't even go in! He brainwashed her, and had a couple kids by her!

Kidnapping of Jaycee Lee Dugard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

EVENTUALLY they threw the book at him and his "wife". I guess they HAD to after like 2 decades and all the press and all! But don't be surprised if he is out of jail TOMORROW!

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8613638].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Ken_Caudill

US Marshals should follow the law. We can't arrest people because we don't like them or for something they might do.

But the way it is SUPPOSED to work is that if they have been convicted of a RELEVANT case, they would be BARRED from some facilitating life. So IDEALLY a pedophile would not be allowed within a certain distance of schools, teaching, etc.... They would have to REGISTER with the police to facilitate such things. They would ALSO be the first suspected in the case of proximity or similar MO, if within reasonable parameters. ALSO, if there is an accusation of such things, it would be taken MORE seriously.

If all that happened, JAYCEE would have been rescued FAR earlier!

Steve

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8615171].message }}

seasoned

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Ken_Caudill

The law doesn't work that way.

Sorry.

It's SUPPOSED TO! A teacher that is a pedophile is NOT supposed to be allowed to be a teacher. A pedophile is NOT supposed to be able to be able to live near a school.

etc....

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636618].message }}

Kay King

11 years ago

You want something to be outraged about? How about a news report today:

Congress has proposed a new law that would prohibit ANYONE (janitor, administrator, teacher, cafeteria worker) who has been convicted of rape or molestation/sexual abuse....from every working in a school.

Sounds like it would make sense...right?

TEACHER'S UNIONS are against it - I listened as a union rep explained "everyone deserves a second chance". He went on to say the background checks are 'too expensive". Apparently safety of children is not the main priority of those unions???

Unions oppose bipartisan effort to keep criminals out of public schools - EAGnews.org powered by Education Action Group Foundation, Inc.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

Live life like someone left the gate open

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636758].message }}

thunderbird

11 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

You want something to be outraged about? How about a news report today:

Congress has proposed a new law that would prohibit ANYONE (janitor, administrator, teacher, cafeteria worker) who has been convicted of rape or molestation/sexual abuse....from every working in a school.

Sounds like it would make sense...right?

TEACHER'S UNIONS are against it - I listened as a union rep explained "everyone deserves a second chance". He went on to say the background checks are 'too expensive". Apparently safety of children is not the main priority of those unions???

Unions oppose bipartisan effort to keep criminals out of public schools - EAGnews.org powered by Education Action Group Foundation, Inc.

Incredible. What on earth are they thinking? That is completely irresponsible and goes against the research on perverts. With such as stance, they have failed as leaders and should be fired right away. It doesn't make sense on any level, not even their own interests. I would never give a "second chance" to any pedophile when it comes to my child. Pedophilia is not curable. Harvard Health: "There is no cure, so the focus is on protecting children." Pessimism About Pedophilia - Harvard Health Publications

Thanks

Signature

Project HERE.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8636883].message }}

thunderbird

11 years ago

I like to think that the police are actually watching him closely, but stating otherwise so that he lets his guard down, making it easier to track him. Hopefully he's no longer driven by his demented cravings, and will refrain from molesting more victims. How likely is that? Most such perverts can't control their deviant compulsions. He is described as a remorseless psychopath.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Project HERE.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8615265].message }}

Kay King 11 years ago

I couldn't understand why you were so worried about this one person but then found the initial article that appears to be the source of the "news" on this.

Edmonton police say U.S. counterparts can

I can't find facts to back up several of the claims in that article - and the article appears to be the basis of other 'news' articles about this person.

There must be more on this guy than can be found online - otherwise the article's reaction to someone jumping parole seems almost hysterical.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
Live life like someone left the gate open
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8615652].message }}

HeySal

11 years ago

One thing we'll never know is what kind of bargaining went on for him to get free, too. If he got less than 10 years for those charges if a minor was involved, they either put him away on weak evidence or they made some sort of bargain and released him early. If it was a bargain to sting someone, they sure aren't going to be flashing that on the news.