Man Ordered to Wear "I Am a Sex Offender" T-Shirt

I can't decide if this is a "stupid human tricks" thread or a "horrible crime" thread. Anyway:

A Delaware judge on Friday ordered a man who twice exposed himself to a 10-year-old girl at his workplace to wear a T-shirt with the words: "I am a registered sex offender" in bold letters, a prosecutor said.

Russell Teeter, 69, who pleaded guilty to two counts of indecent exposure, also was sentenced to 60 days in jail by Superior Court Judge Jan Jurden in Wilmington.

Deputy Attorney General Donald Roberts said he requested the unusual T-shirt punishment because he was concerned about Teeter exposing himself to children at the gardening business he runs with his wife.

"This is a unique way to let his customers know that he is a sex offender," Roberts told Reuters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

I can't decide if this is a "stupid human tricks" thread or a "horrible crime" thread. Anyway:

A Delaware judge on Friday ordered a man who twice exposed himself to a 10-year-old girl at his workplace to wear a T-shirt with the words: "I am a registered sex offender" in bold letters, a prosecutor said.

Russell Teeter, 69, who pleaded guilty to two counts of indecent exposure, also was sentenced to 60 days in jail by Superior Court Judge Jan Jurden in Wilmington.

Deputy Attorney General Donald Roberts said he requested the unusual T-shirt punishment because he was concerned about Teeter exposing himself to children at the gardening business he runs with his wife.

"This is a unique way to let his customers know that he is a sex offender," Roberts told Reuters.

---

is this type of punishment written out on the law?....I doubt it.

I don´t see how a judge can legally make up whatever sentence he sees fit.

Sounds like a very fitting sentence.

~:smoking:

Is he allowed to wear a hat that says: "ignore this t-shirt"

There are so many ways to get around that and make it seem like he's wearing it for a joke or something, it's silly.

:idea2:

I see some problems with that. Like how you're going to make him go through with it.

"I haven't worn it for some time but it's not my fault. I haven't washed it for 2 months and laundry machine broke down."

Doesn't the US constitution prevent this?

I also just noticed that he can just wear it under another shirt.

just silly...and downright illegal from my standpoint.

Constitution isn't generally very lax on Sex Offenders... I think once you've been convicted you lose the Right to your most basic freedoms if the court orders it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wakizashi

Constitution isn't generally very lax on Sex Offenders... I think once you've been convicted you lose the Right to your most basic freedoms if the court orders it.

---

but can´t the court just aplly punishments that are described in the law?......or is there actually a point in the american penal code describing the use of tshirts with messages as penal discipline?

Ultimate sentence is up to the judge unless there is a law that clearly states minimum and maximum, and even then the judge can skirt that if he wants (at the risk of his career of course)

His wife should divorce him and take the business, before it ruins the company. While the punishment seems kind of funny and veangeful, in reality it is also punishing this mans family and thats wrong.

He Should Wear that Shirt, Sure.... In Jail. I hear Jail Inmates Really don't Like People who do bad things with kids....

Its just wrong making him wear it, it is humiliating for his family, it could be taken as a joke, it could leave to him being beaten/hurt on the street by random passers-by, and he might even get round wearing it... silly :egypt:

Dude, how do you think the 10 year old girl feels now?? If he gets beat up, Tough. You do something Bad in Life, you get punished, Deal with it people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by {BHC}KingWarman888

Dude, how do you think the 10 year old girl feels now?? If he gets beat up, Tough. You do something Bad in Life, you get punished, Deal with it people.

---

There are the other 3 reasons aswell :2thumbsup:

but, some inncocent members of the public might get hurt, even arrested and plausibly put before court for attacking him.... they suffer aswell,

The point of sentancing is to define the exact punishment the criminal should be subjected too, (although i admit the malleability of jail sentances makes a mockery of this) - the moment you have a sentance that allows other people outside of the elgal system top punish, you completely destroy the point of having a court proceeding anyway (once you know he's guilty)

:egypt:

Were can I get these T-shirts? I have a friend who's having his birthday soon...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wakizashi

Constitution isn't generally very lax on Sex Offenders... I think once you've been convicted you lose the Right to your most basic freedoms if the court orders it.

---

Eighth Amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Now I don't know whether the words "cruel and unusual" have specific legal meanings, but this judgement is certainly unusual, and you could make a strong argument that it is cruel. That is why I asked the original question.

Rather an idoitic sentence, if the judge was that concerned about the possible harm the man would do to children he should of imposed a harsher sentence in the means of jail time. The wearing of the T-Shirt smacks to much of the time depicated (SP) in the novel "The Scarlet Letter"

Edit: can't spell at all today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by {BHC}KingWarman888

Dude, how do you think the 10 year old girl feels now?? If he gets beat up, Tough. You do something Bad in Life, you get punished, Deal with it people.

---

fine...then put him in jail.

hell....make it public to his new "bunk buddies" what he did to get in there...I have no problem with that.

but like it has already been stated this tshirt thing has a number of drawbacks.

-it can affect other innocent people
-it comes across as a joke
-I can think of 12 ways of getting around the punishment off the top of my head without even trying

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scurvy

There are the other 3 reasons aswell :2thumbsup:

but, some inncocent members of the public might get hurt, even arrested and plausibly put before court for attacking him.... they suffer aswell,

The point of sentancing is to define the exact punishment the criminal should be subjected too, (although i admit the malleability of jail sentances makes a mockery of this) - the moment you have a sentance that allows other people outside of the elgal system top punish, you completely destroy the point of having a court proceeding anyway (once you know he's guilty)

:egypt:

---

Even Still. You do that, you get punish. I'm done posting here..

Would this same sentence also have been used if it had been a woman? No, because the law of Indecent Exposure only applies to men. I hate double standards...:wall:

Since this thread is about sex offenders, this story is appropiate:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

You hear that gents? According to the British Airlines, you are all potential child molestors so you are not allowed to sit near children on flights! Never mind the loads of evidence that show that women abuse children far more than men! Seriously, how do they get away with this blatant sexism?:furious3:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by {BHC}KingWarman888

Even Still. You do that, you get punish. I'm done posting here..

---

:juggle2:

I so want to get that T-shirt.

It sounds like it'll beat the hell out of every crappy Hot Topic T-shirts out there. My Super Saiyan Snappy Emo rating will go sky high when I wear that to school and get into a trouble or two.

This is not nearly as bad/awesome as the "man forced to marry goat" on from africa.

did they make him wear a "i'm married to a goat" t-shirt :beam:

Here's another idea. Why don't they just put him and his family in stocks in the town square and encourage the locals to bring rotten fruit to throw at them?

He should be punished but not in this manner.

As worse punishment would be making the man wear a t-shirt that says "My last name is Teeter".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IRONxMortlock

Here's another idea. Why don't they just put him and his family in stocks in the town square and encourage the locals to bring rotten fruit to throw at them?

---

The judge obviously didn't read The Lottery, else he'd get the idea. :tongue:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregoshi

As worse punishment would be making the man wear a t-shirt that says "My last name is Teeter".

---

I don't get it. My last name is Teeter.

They should tatoo it on his forehead. Or from cheek to cheek across his face. This just isn't good enough. :furious3:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

Ultimate sentence is up to the judge unless there is a law that clearly states minimum and maximum, and even then the judge can skirt that if he wants (at the risk of his career of course)

---

So you are saying that in the US in some to many cases the judges determine their sentences without bounderies (except the vague boundry in the 8th amendment)?
What about the seperation of powers? If this is true than the judicial power takes over some tasks of the legislative power. Where are the checks and balances?


About the sentence:
What a load of crap. I know here in Europe we are more concerned with our right to privacy than in the US but common. This will affect his whole family, friends, neighbours, ...
This is a cruel punishment for everybody connected with the man in question. I won't even start about the rights of the man himself as it seems that for some people here he might as well be lynched.

I support creative sentencing. This was clearly a case where the judge wanted to make a headline and draw attention to the crime, I would imagine in an effort to curb any similar instances from occurring in the future.

I hope it did cause a massive fight with his family and that in the future he will remember his actions effect more people than just himself.

If I were the girl’s father I would spend time every weekend putting up flyers around the guys business describing the criminal actions of the proprietor of the business they are going to.

This guy is not the victim here the 10 year old girl who had to see his 69 year old wiener is.

Noone is disputing the fact that the girl is the victim. The point is that people (family, friends, ...) are being punished without violating the law. A far better sentence IMHO would've been a fine or jailtime (or both), damages for the girl, a restriction to get anywhere near children or places they could be and mandatory treatment for the man.

I'm sure treatment will do society far more good than making him and anyone around him social outcasts. We're not in medieval times anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peasant Phill

We're not in medieval times anymore.

---

That’s the beautiful thing about the creative punishment thing; we don’t have to be in the medieval times to enjoy humiliating freaks and their families. IMO the reaction from a humiliated family is a far better punishment than anything the state could dish out, and a public display like this is sure to be noted by any other freak considering dropping trow in front of another little girl.

*takes giant bite out of the leg of some roasted beast “serving wench, more ale!”*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yesdachi

That’s the beautiful thing about the creative punishment thing; we don’t have to be in the medieval times to enjoy humiliating freaks and their families. IMO the reaction from a humiliated family is a far better punishment than anything the state could dish out, and a public display like this is sure to be noted by any other freak considering dropping trow in front of another little girl.

*takes giant bite out of the leg of some roasted beast “serving wench, more ale!”*

---

Criminal punishment is not meant to be for your amusement.

I would wear this shirt without having pulled my pud in front of a 10-year old.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrossLOPER

Criminal punishment is not meant to be for your amusement.

---

It may not be meant for my amusement but that doesn’t mean I can’t be amused by it. :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yesdachi

That’s the beautiful thing about the creative punishment thing; we don’t have to be in the medieval times to enjoy humiliating freaks and their families. IMO the reaction from a humiliated family is a far better punishment than anything the state could dish out, and a public display like this is sure to be noted by any other freak considering dropping trow in front of another little girl.

*takes giant bite out of the leg of some roasted beast “serving wench, more ale!”*

---

The problem with "creative punishment" is that one tends to get differing sentences for the same crime. Whilst you may think the wearing of a T-shirt is creative enough for this crime, many others would argue that jail time would be more appropriate. Still other would argue that a spell in a paedophile rehabilitation clinic would be more sensible.

Tell me, if the latter course had been chosen, would you have still said you supported the judge, or would that have been seen as the soft option?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

The problem with "creative punishment" is that one tends to get differing sentences for the same crime. Whilst you may think the wearing of a T-shirt is creative enough for this crime, many others would argue that jail time would be more appropriate. Still other would argue that a spell in a paedophile rehabilitation clinic would be more sensible.

Tell me, if the latter course had been chosen, would you have still said you supported the judge, or would that have been seen as the soft option?

---

Judges are elected (or appointed) for their ability to judge, I would support the judges sentence either way, if I didn’t I would be sure not to vote for him (or those responsible for his appointment) in the future. I think a rehabilitation option and a fine would have been an acceptable punishment for a first time offence but without knowing the details of the situation I can’t really judge, but I would guess from the sentence the guy must have done something to fire the judge up.

I think our justice system is often a lame duck and occasionally needs a creative punishment to better fit the offender. Example, a rich guy getting a fine for littering, woopie, right? How about a punishment that better fits the crime, perhaps being forced to ware an “I’m a litterbug” shirt for a month, boardroom meetings and all. Obviously to the judge this flasher needed a more dynamic punishment.

Reminds me of one of Iain M Banks's Culture novels. A man kills another man. His punishment is to be followed around by a drone forever to make sure he doesn't do it again. It doesn't seem like much of a punishment, but as it's put in the book "try getting invited to parties after that".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yesdachi

That’s the beautiful thing about the creative punishment thing; we don’t have to be in the medieval times to enjoy humiliating freaks and their families. IMO the reaction from a humiliated family is a far better punishment than anything the state could dish out,

---

Why do you want to humiliate the family? They've done nothing wrong.

Yes, the offender should be punished, he commited the crime. However by using such punishment you make his family and frends suffer just as much - put it this way, if soemone in your family was made to wear that t-shirt, would you feel it was right? (i ceretainly wouldnt - i'd feel almost as hmiliated as the offender)

Quote:

---

I think our justice system is often a lame duck and occasionally needs a creative punishment to better fit the offender. Example, a rich guy getting a fine for littering, woopie, right? How about a punishment that better fits the crime, perhaps being forced to ware an “I’m a litterbug” shirt for a month, boardroom meetings and all. .

---

I actually agree with this, creative punishment is far better than jail time for some crimes - although i would claim for the "rich guy littering" simply having to pick litter off the streets for 6 a month would be an appropriate punishment.

however it is important that creative punishment doesnt make the family suffer anymore than seeing a relative go to jail.

:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scurvy

Why do you want to humiliate the family? They've done nothing wrong.

Yes, the offender should be punished, he commited the crime. However by using such punishment you make his family and frends suffer just as much - put it this way, if soemone in your family was made to wear that t-shirt, would you feel it was right? (i ceretainly wouldnt - i'd feel almost as hmiliated as the offender)

---

Exactly what I’ll bet the judge was going for. The flasher doesn’t seem to have much concern about what he has been exposed for, but maybe the threat of embarrassing his family and having them pissed at him again would force him to think about his actions before showing little girls 69 year old man parts again.

If it happened to someone in my family I would be pissed as ever, at the family member that did it, much like my family was at me. Funny story, I was suspended from high school for flashing a bus full of a visiting girl’s basketball team (mom was sooo proud). Ahhh, the good old days, I would have gotten away with it had my principal not been standing on the opposite side of the bus as it pulled away, Instead I got to be called “flash” for about 6 months until someone else did something stupid and people (not my mom) forgot.

People eventually forget the stupid things we do and hopefully we learn from them. Granted my experience was more of a prank than the one from the article but similar enough to apply the same rationale. Being suspended was a piece of cake compared to the grief I caused and received from my family. Lesson learned.

Man, I want that shirt! You guys think you can buy such a shirt on e-bay?

Tough I have mixed feelings about it, I can understand parents and the victims that they think this might protect children and others, but still... I don't think this is a verry good solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gertgregoor

Man, I want that shirt! You guys think you can buy such a shirt on e-bay?

Tough I have mixed feelings about it, I can understand parents and the victims that they think this might protect children and others, but still... I don't think this is a verry good solution.

---

You could have it made yourself without spending much money.

I don't see what the argument is that somehow wearing this T-shirt will put an undue burden on the man's family and friends. Wearing an identifying T-shirt is verboten, but being sent to the big house, that's not embarrassing to the guy's family and friends?

Child molestation is such a thorny issue to come up with good answers for because the recitvism rate is so damn high (depending on which study you read, >80%), the crime itself is so terrible and the victims are so helpless and innocent.

Seeking to make the molester's life as painful as possible is not justice, But then neither is seeking to let him off at the expense of this victim and future ones.. Justice should be concerned with stopping the crime in the future. Sadly, it would appear there is no way to do this, as the crime is getting much worse, and now, based on what I've seen in this thread, it's becoming more and more acceptable. A very sad case indeed. :shame:

If we do not learn how to protect our offspring better than this, we will expire as a species. It is the single most important thing we do in our lives, yet as a society, we seem to be entirely too tolerant of this evil that afflicts our children. Personally, I think even one offense of molesting a child should get you life without possibility of parole. Murderers might learn from the mistakes, but we already know an overwhelming majority of pedophiles won't.

No, yesdachi, its bullcrap. If you want to teach the guy a lesson, send him to prison. That will teach him a lesson. If what he did is soooooo bad then send him to frikking prison, don't make him wear a ftw t-shirt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

No, yesdachi, its bullcrap. If you want to teach the guy a lesson, send him to prison. That will teach him a lesson. If what he did is soooooo bad then send him to frikking prison, don't make him wear a ftw t-shirt.

---

Well since the repeat offender rate for people that go to prison is like 80% I think creative punishment is a great option under the right circumstances. But hey, who can argue with your “bullcrap” defense. ~D

This 80% number is making me suspicious. From the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics:

• Of the 272,111 persons released from prisons in 15 States in 1994, an estimated 67.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.9% were reconvicted, and 25.4% resentenced to prison for a new crime.
• The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 accounted for nearly 4,877,000 arrest charges over their recorded careers.
• Within 3 years of release, 2.5% of released rapists were rearrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for a new homicide.
• Sex offenders were less likely than non-sex offenders to be rearrested for any offense –– 43 percent of sex offenders versus 68 percent of non-sex offenders.
• Sex offenders were about four times more likely than non-sex offenders to be arrested for another sex crime after their discharge from prison –– 5.3 percent of sex offenders versus 1.3 percent of non-sex offenders.

So 67.5% of cons get re-arrested, 46.9% get reconvicted, and 24.4% go back to the slammer. Sex offenders are less likely to get re-arrested, but more likely to return to jail.

Nice to have some hard data.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDC

Reminds me of one of Iain M Banks's Culture novels. A man kills another man. His punishment is to be followed around by a drone forever to make sure he doesn't do it again. It doesn't seem like much of a punishment, but as it's put in the book "try getting invited to parties after that".

---

I'm quite a fan of those books. Which one is that?

Okay, if the number is 80%, 85% or even 67% (which is only the guys who got caught a 2nd time, by the way, ones who were smart enough to get a better MO wouldn't show up there), do you think a 2 in 3 chance of letting a guy go is good enough odds for your kids? I don't think they are for mine.

Not to mention, those are terrifying numbers. Of the 67%, only 50% will get convicted, and of those, only 25% will do time. Forget about 'good lawyer' versus 'innocence' argument, what about the other 25% that were convicted for a SECOND time but didn't get sent back to jail? And you think we're being hard on these guys? Come on... this is why little boys and little girls are turning up dead all over the country. These guys learn in prison: leave no witnesses alive.

When I get home tonight, I'm going to drop into the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and I'll drop some numbers on you. But suffice it so say, 1 in 5 little girls and 1 in 10 little boys will be molested prior to their 16th birthday, but only about 35% of crimes are even reported in the first place. Good odds for the baby rapers.

That's "baby rapists", Don. I don't find the number that surprising, really...assuming that each child molester goes after multiple children, that's, what, one paedo for every 50 Yanks or so? Probably not so different in Canada, either. It about lines up with those stats I found on incest that one crazy day in the library.

I'm beginning to believe that perhaps the Medieval Europeans had something right in their thought process. When you catch the Wolf Preying On your Cattle, do you cage him for 5 years, giving him a relatively relaxed lifestyle with Good Food and Water Everyday, in hopes that after those 5 years he won't touch your cattle again, or anyone elses cattle for that matter? ... or do you find the bastard, and cut off it's head so that you don't have to worry about that one particular wolf killing your only means of survival?

Perhaps though; I don't do myself many favours by branding Criminals as being lower on the food chain than your Common Earth Worm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Okay, if the number is 80%, 85% or even 67% (which is only the guys who got caught a 2nd time, by the way, ones who were smart enough to get a better MO wouldn't show up there), do you think a 2 in 3 chance of letting a guy go is good enough odds for your kids? I don't think they are for mine.

---

I wasn't commenting on whether the odds were good, bad, or whether we should do anything in particular. I was just having one of my lemurly attacks of wanting to find some numbers with substance. If you'll recall, I had much the same reaction to the disproved one-in-three women will be raped statistic. It just made me itchy; it sounded made-up, and it was.

I don't have any bright ideas about what we ought to do with sexual criminals. For my personal satisfaction, I've used an online mapping service that shows me locations, mugshots and conviction records of sex offenders in my community. I don't intend to harrass them, but I will be able to recognize them on sight, which is fine by me.

Don't look to the lemur for a grand theory of What Should Be Done. On this, as with many issues, I'm still looking, listening and reading.

We should Banish them... as an alternative to killing. The Earths a little cramped... so we should find some little non-assuming planet, pack em' into a Rocket, and Hope they make it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoreBag

You could have it made yourself without spending much money.

---

Always about money, always everything's about money. Money is so overated. I rather see someone smile, even if for a second, then to get some money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gertgregoor

Always about money, always everything's about money. Money is so overated. I rather see someone smile, even if for a second, then to get some money.

---

well, it depends how much --> if i get the money i smile :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wakizashi

We should Banish them... as an alternative to killing. The Earths a little cramped... so we should find some little non-assuming planet, pack em' into a Rocket, and Hope they make it.

---

Sounds expensive... Just pay them to behave in future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gertgregoor

Always about money, always everything's about money. Money is so overated. I rather see someone smile, even if for a second, then to get some money.

---

Well, to be honest, I measure costs in beer. I saved about 4.5L of beer the last time I custom-made an offensive t-shirt. It's also money I can use towards more offensive t-shirts. But, you know, if you like to waste, be my guest.

bob and david saw this coming.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShgX1v42hPE