“Before SB-145, an 18-year-old male convicted of having oral or anal sex with a 17-year-old male would be required to register as a sex offender, while a 24-year-old male convicted of having penile-vaginal sex with a 15-year-old female would not be automatically required to register – it would be left up to the judge”.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill...lifornia%3famp
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.abc...0-c745cad03c80
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usa...amp/3456171001
Anyways, this is concerning since I live in California.
Okay reading further into the bill, I can see why it was changed:” One thing that appears to have been lost in this discussion and is obscured by the comments Gonzalez, Bry and Faulconer have made: Sex with a 14-year-old is illegal. It was illegal before SB 145, and it remains illegal now.
SB 145 addresses a disparity in the law specifically with regard to whether people who commit sexual offenses must also register as a sex offender.
Before SB 145, the law treated statutory rape cases – in which the victim is between 14 and 17 and the perpetrator is between the ages of 18 and 24 and within 10 years of a victim’s age – differently depending on whether the people involved were gay or straight. In cases involving vaginal penetration, a judge had the discretion to decide whether the perpetrator should be placed on the sex offender registry; but in cases involving anal or oral intercourse, common forms of sexual intercourse for gay couples, the sex offender registry was mandatory. SB 145 allows the same judicial discretion for all cases.
Sen. Scott Weiner, who is gay and wrote the bill, said this bill is about equal treatment under the law.
“An 18-year-old having sexual intercourse with a 17-year-old is different than a 24-year-old teacher having sex with a 14-year-old student. Most judges in that case would say that person would go on the registry because there’s a power imbalance and it’s never appropriate,” he said.
Wiener said the fact that the law treats sex crimes in which there’s an age gap of 10 or fewer years differently is a separate issue that would require another bill to address.
“It’s important to distinguish the broader structure of sex offender registry. People can have whatever views they want about the 10-year discretionary standard,” Weiner said. “It’s a separate issue regardless of what structure. It is what it’s been for 76 years. The question is: Should gay people be treated the same as straight people? Our equality should not be conditioned on making some broader change to the sex offender registry.”
Dan Felizzatto, a deputy district attorney in the Los Angeles County DA’s office, echoed that statement and said legislators could introduce new legislation to change how that 10-year age gap is addressed, but thinks expanding the registry would pose its own challenges. He said law enforcement wants to be able to use the sex offender registry as it was originally intended – as an investigatory tool and to monitor serial predators.
Rick Zbur, Equality California’s executive director, said it’s been common throughout the struggle for LGBTQ rights for opponents to advance a narrative that LGBTQ individuals are deviants or predators.”
09-23-2020, 07:18 PM
Re: LGBTQ, in LC and Beyond.
Hybrid Mode
