Child Predator Pursues 13-Year-Old Daughter of Romeo and Juliet Offender, But It’s Not a Crime.

When we talk about Registered Sex Offenders here, they’re usually nonviolent, Romeo and Juliet type of offenders, and how the current system is failing them—but what about the other ways the system is failing?

Ryan Murdock, a father and registered sex offender from a Romeo and Juliet relationship, was powerless to protect his daughter when she was contacted by a child predator because he “hadn’t broken any laws”.

52-year-old Mark Charles, a sex offender who has been investigated on numerous occasions and spent 7 years in prison for pursuing teenage girls, used Facebook Messenger to reach out and try to “go out to have a good time” with Ryan’s 13-year-old daughter.  He contacted the girl several times, implying that he knew her parents, and even using a family nickname for her brother in an attempt to meet up with her.

The girl quickly showed Ryan the messages she received, and Ryan was quick to contact the police, but it wouldn’t do any good. Mark Charles hadn’t violated any laws. He had completed his probation, he was allowed to use social media, there was nothing stopping him from talking to minors, and the messages had not taken on a sexual nature.

This is just another way that this outdated system is causing pain and struggle for families everywhere. A family man just trying keep his family safe is placed on the same list, and under the same rules, as the man pursuing his 13-year-old daughter.

A Sex Offender Messaged Their Daughter, But No Law Was Broken

Convicted after Consensual Teenage Sex? Please Share Your Story!

The response since we posted about Wisconsin’s reduction in penalties and criminal classification for close-in-age teen sexual relationships on Thursday has confirmed what we’ve long believed: almost no one wants teenagers sent to prison and placed on the sex offender registry for consensual sex with peers.

One of the most significant obstacles in combatting this issue is that many Americans simply don’t believe it’s happening.

Showing the public, and legislator, the real people impacted by these misguided laws is the best way to impact their views and spur them to action.  We’re gathering stories on our blog, and already have heard from people saying, “I really didn’t believe it was that common,” or “I didn’t even know that was a crime!”

Help us increase that impact by sharing your story, or connecting us with someone you know who was arrested, convicted, imprisoned, and/or placed on the sex offender registry as the result of a close-in-age consensual relationship.

Use the contact form on this site, or email us at Stories@TheRegistryTrap.com

Wisconsin Adopts Romeo and Juliet Law…Sort of

Yesterday, Governor Scott Walker signed 2017 Assembly Bill 414 (now 2017 Wisconsin Act 174), creating the brand new crime of Underage Sexual Activity. In a saner world, a statute specifically criminalizing consensual sex between teenagers wouldn’t be good news, but that’s not the world we live in.

As you already know if you’ve read Robert’s story, his conviction for that very same act carries a much uglier name: 2nd Degree Sexual Assault of a Child.  In addition, that crime was a felony, and a registry offense.

As of March 30 (one day after today’s publication of the Act), sex with a “child” who has attained the age of 15 will, if the actor is under the age of 19:

  • Be known as Underage Sexual Activity rather than 2nd Degree Sexual Assault of a Child
  • Be a Class A misdemeanor rather than a Class C felony
  • Carry a maximum sentence of 9 months in jail, rather than up to 40 years in prison
  • Not require sex offender registration and reporting, unless it is necessary in the interest of public protection

While the more reasonable model is to provide an exception to the prohibition on sex with a minor for age peers, this change represents a significant–and, for many people, life-altering–improvement.

If this law had been in effect in 1999, Robert would not have a felony conviction today, and would be eligible for small business loans and other opportunities. He would have been incarcerated for no more than 9 months–less than 1/5 of the time he served. That time would have been served in a county jail rather than a state prison.

He would never have been required to register as a sex offender, and could have developed an entirely different relationship with his stepdaughter and nieces, since he would have been free to take them to parks and carnivals, attend school events, and otherwise play a natural role in their lives. He wouldn’t have felt that he had to delay having his own child for years, until he had completed parole and could be sure that his life wouldn’t be interrupted again.

He wouldn’t have hit a major speed bump, professionally and psychologically, when an angry former employee told an important client about his conviction.

Those are just the differences that are clear and concrete. This list barely scratches the surface of the harm that could have been avoided: stress on his family, loss of business opportunities, strain on his relationship and more. And, his story is not unique.

This change in the law is a major victory, and one we intend to see enacted (or topped) in every state. But, it’s a bittersweet victory, because much of the damage Robert and others suffered under the prior law cannot be undone.

 

 

Robert’s Story, Part I

When Taylor County Sheriff’s Department Detective Harlan Schwartz knocked on the door of Robert’s apartment early on the morning of September 20, 1999, Robert wasn’t concerned. He had a good job, he was back together with his childhood sweetheart, and his life seemed to be moving in exactly the right direction. He was confident that he hadn’t done anything that would get him into trouble with the law.

It may have been that confidence that led Robert to talk to Detective Schwartz on the spot, without consulting an attorney or even taking time to think the situation through or talk to a friend. Maybe not, though—by all accounts, Robert had always been open, friendly, and social. He might have made the same decision under any circumstances.

When the detective started asking about a girl he’d dated  months earlier, Robert thought he knew what was going on. A week or so earlier, his ex-girlfriend, J., had called him out of the blue. Back when he’d been dating J., her mother had loaned him some money, and she wanted it back. Robert hadn’t had the money on hand to pay her immediately, and he’d heard her raise her voice in anger in the background as he talked to J.

Now, a police detective was in his apartment, asking questions about his long-past relationship with her daughter.

Robert wasn’t shy about admitting to the sexual relationship. In fact, he says now that he embellished a bit. Like many teens and young adults, Robert didn’t fully understand the law regarding age of consent in his home state. J. had been 15 when they were together, but he’d only been 17—a minor himself. He was sure that meant that their sexual relationship had been 100% legal. He may have been gloating a bit while he was hanging himself, thinking that J.’s mother would be in for a surprise when she realized that he’d been underage the whole time.

Whatever he expected to come from that conversation, it wasn’t a felony sex crime conviction that would ultimately send him to prison for four years of an eight-year sentence, haunt him for years to come, and require him to register as a sex offender.  Even if he had known enough to expect criminal charges, he could never have imagined that in his mid-thirties, as a successful business man with a family, he would still be struggling to manage the fallout from that brief relationship.

Perhaps the saddest and most ironic thing about Robert’s story is that he had a rough childhood and adolescence. He wasn’t always a good kid. By the time he was fourteen, he’d had several encounters with local law enforcement.

At 12, he was with a friend who stole a carton of cigarettes. At 14, he forged a signature on a check a friend had stolen from his mother and accepted some of the money after his friend cashed the check. Over the next couple of years, he racked up an underage drinking charge, what he describes as “a lot of curfew violations,” and a theft charge relating to an inexpensive necklace. At 15 or 16, he was caught joyriding with his cousin, who is now serving a 12-year prison sentence for robbing a gun shop.

But, when he met J. in the fall of 1998, that was all behind him. He was 17, working steadily, and just months from renting his first apartment. He hadn’t had a brush with the law in a couple of years, and he had started to forge his own path. On that day, he was just a typical teenaged boy, hanging out with friends when a pretty girl drove up with a friend and caught his attention. If anything set him apart at that point, it was that he was a bit more self-sufficient than most kids his age. He’d started working at 15, taking on short-term jobs at two fast food restaurants before moving into roofing and drywall work.

Robert says that he initially thought J. was 16–just one year younger than he was–because she’d driven up to the house. Under Wisconsin law, what happened next would have been a crime regardless, though a less serious one.

What followed is a familiar story for most of us, one that plays out among teenagers all over the country every single day. J. gave Robert her phone number, and a few days later, he called her. They dated, met each other’s friends, and got to know each other’s families. Like many romantic relationships among teenagers, though, this one didn’t last long.

While J. was still in school and living with her parents, Robert was working full time in construction. In the spring of 1999, he had an opportunity to work in the Elkhorn area, more than three hours from the town where J. lived and went to school. Unsurprisingly, the relatively new relationship couldn’t weather the separation. The two parted ways near the end of the school year, just six or seven months after they’d met.

It was the kind of relationship that both Robert and J. might both have relegated to a vague memory if just one small thing had gone differently: if J.’s mother hadn’t loaned Robert money, if he’d had the money to give her on the day J. called, if she’d filed a small claims suit instead of calling the police, if he’d politely declined to talk to the detective who knocked on his door. If any one of those things had played out differently, both Robert and J. would likely have carried on with their lives and rarely, if ever, looked back.

But, Robert did owe J.’s mother money. He didn’t have it to give her when she called. She called the police. Robert answered their questions when they arrived. And, their short-lived teenage relationship took center stage in both of their lives. Robert is still living with the fallout 20 years after their break-up.

Update: Since publication of this piece, Wisconsin law has changed, as described here.

17-Year-Old Convicted of Felony Child Pornography

Just in case you thought we’d maxed out on the insanity surrounding teen criminal charges and sex offender registration stemming from consensual sexual activity, this Washington case introduces a couple of new twists.

The defendant, who was also the sole victim, was a 17-year-old male with Asperger’s syndrome. (For those unfamiliar with the condition, Asperger’s is on the autism spectrum, and is characterized in part by an inability to read social cues and discern appropriate behavior.)

His crime was sending a photograph of his penis to an adult woman–an act that would not have been a registry offense if he’d been 18.

The Washington State Supreme Court upheld the conviction, relying in part on the reasoning that the legislature could have excluded teens if it so chose. (But…hey…Justices…about that “the perpetrator is also the victim” issue…?)

There may be a moment of sanity coming, though. The Washington legislature seems to have taken the court’s argument to heart, and is at work to craft a solution that would protect teens–at least, to a degree. The state Senate approved a bill that would exempt teens who share explicit photos of themselves or others from the felony child pornography law. Under some circumstances, those sharing photos could still be charged with a misdemeanor.

The bill is awaiting a vote in the House.

Olympia Takes on Sexting by Kids

 

 

 

 

 

Virginia Legislator Aims to Protect Teens from Child Pornography Charges

The Virginia Senate has passed a bill that would reduce charges for teens facing criminal charges for “sexting”. The bill’s sponsor, Virginia Senator Scott Surovell, acknowledges that exchanging explicit photos is a common practice among high school students and says, “We don’t want to make every kid in the school a felon.”

Unfortunately, it appears that Surovell, who started out with the right idea, is comfortable making every kid in the school (or, at least, the significant percentage who admit to exchanging sexually explicit photos) a criminal, so long as that crime is a misdemeanor.

The bill is a step in the right direction, but it doesn’t decriminalize sexting between similar-age teens. It only allows the prosecutor the option of charging teen defendants with a misdemeanor instead of a felony. Teens “sexting” with other teens could still face felony charges, and could still be required to register as sex offenders.

Teens Could Avoid Felony Charges for “Sexting”: Senate Passes Bill

California Backs Away from Lifetime Sex Offender Registration

In October, California governor Jerry Brown signed a bill that will allow registered sex offenders to petition for removal from both the public registry and law enforcement listings.

Interestingly, the bill had significant support from law enforcement, for the same reason cited by many critics of sex offender registration policies across the country: with 100,000 names on the registry, it was difficult for both law enforcement and the public to determine who presented a threat.

Previously, California required those convicted of “registry offense” sex crimes to register for life.

Under the new law, about 90% of registered sex offenders will be able to petition for removal after either 10 or 20 years, as long as they have not committed a serious crime such as a violent felony or another sex crime in the interim.

This common-sense modification benefits law enforcement and communities as much as it does rehabilitated sex offenders and those who should never have been placed on the registry, such as teens who were involved in consensual sexual relationships with other teens. But, it’s taken years to get the measure through the legislature because many politicians don’t want to be associated with this type of bill–a problem that stands in the way of needed reform in many states and at the federal level.

New California Law Allows Sex Offenders to be Removed from the Registry

14-Year Old Girl Charged with Felony Distribution of Child Pornography

The Minnesota teen sent a revealing selfie to her boyfriend, but then had second thoughts. Concerned that he was sharing the photo with other classmates, she went to a school counselor for help.

The girl’s concerns were well founded. The boy had shared the photo, which she’d sent through Snapchat, with other teens. She didn’t get the help she was looking for, though. Instead , she ended up facing a felony criminal charge that could derail her life. The Rice County, Minnesota prosecutor charged the girl with felony distribution of child pornography. Even a plea to a lesser charge could put the girl on the Minnesota sex offender registry for ten years.

This case adds a new layer to the insanity of placing teenagers on the sex offender registry for years–or even for life–as a result of consensual sexual activity. In this case, and others like it, the child allegedly being victimized through the creation and distribution of the image is the girl herself. The law that was written to protect children and young teens from predators has itself become a significant threat to them.

Various studies have shown that more than 10% of high school-aged kids admit to having sent or received nude photos, and that about 30% of young adults now admit that they sent such photos in high school.  Thus, the chances of a teenager falling victim to this misguided application of child pornography laws is much greater than the risk that the same teen might fall victim to an actual predator.

Minnesota Prosecutor Charges Sexting Teen Girl with Child Pornography

Genarlow Wilson Receives Black History Achievement Award

Genarlow Wilson was among the first teens to make national news for having a consensual sexual encounter with another teenager. Wilson and five other young men were charged in connection with sexual activity occurring at a party when Wilson was 17. The two young women involved were 15 and 17.

While the other defendants worked out plea agreements, Wilson didn’t want to be forced to register as a sex offender based on a consensual encounter. The high school football star chose to take his case to trial, where he was convicted and sentenced to 10 years in prison.

In 2007, after serving two years of his 10-year sentence, Wilson was released from prison. The high profile nature of his case and the Georgia Supreme Court ruling that the 10-year sentence constituted “cruel and unusual punishment” triggered a change in Georgia law.

Today, Wilson is a college graduate working as a Skills Development Advisor at the Atlanta Workforce Development Agency and is raising a daughter with his wife, Tiffany.

Black History Achievement Award Honoree