Did that get your attention? It got mine. Of course it wasn't on the front page of the Pioneer Press, but in back with the other court reports. I think the words, "Day Care Child Molester" might scare people when Christmas Shopping is so important.
I do harbor some resentments toward our criminal justice system for just that. Thousands of first time drug offenders are currently locked up in Minnesota prisons. I was one of them. I was guilty, there was no question about that. I plead guilty and as one of the terms I agreed to allocute to my crime. I spelled it all out for the prosecutor and the judge, and I added that I should be held accountable for my actions. For that, I was sentenced to 50 months. Now, I only served 15 of those in prison, the last six of which I was in boot camp. But now I'm on house arrest out here. ISR (Intense Supervised Release) is reserved for graduates of boot camp, and repeat sex offenders. I don't like being grouped in with them in ANY way. But here I am.
Here are some recent examples of how lenient judges are on sex-offenders:
Matthew John Rich, of Ramsey County touched a seven year old girl inappropriately on two occasions in 2007. He was living at his mothers house where she ran a daycare. Fortunately for the girl, the statute of limitations had not run out when she worked up the courage to speak about the incidents. He was sentenced to 21 months in prison, but the sentence was stayed and he was put on probation for 25 years. A long time, yes, but he has the chance to repeat his actions.
Thomas Lawrence Monson, a building caretaker in Mounds View, put a camera in a female Tennant's bathroom. He was charged with interfering with privacy, given one year of probation, and if he successfully completed that, the charge will be removed from his record. Good for him. I'm sure he only put the camera up for her safety.
And finally, Peter Matthew Ripka was charged with four felony counts of electronic solicitation of a child. He's 30, and engaged in sexual conversations with four girls ages 13 to 15. He asked sexually explicit questions and persuaded one of them to send him a naked picture. For all of that, he was sentenced to 90 days in jail. Fortunately for him, Judge Judith Tilsen was feeling kind and decided to let him serve that on electronic home monitoring. Don't worry though, he needs permission to use the internet, and he will be on probation for three years.
Why do sex offenders get such leniency? They may not take lives, but don't they take away dignity, pride, and a sense of safety in the world? When a rapist is convicted, does the victim go back to normal life? I think not. There is fear around every corner. Hesitation with any potential partner. And years of recovery in therapy. In a way, that is taking a life. Certainly it is taking away happiness from a life.
I've learned a lot over the last 18 months. My incarceration will have an ever lasting effect on me in every decision I make. So why not send sex offenders to prison more often? Maybe, just maybe, it might break them like it broke me. And only from there could I build myself back up.
I do harbor some resentments toward our criminal justice system for just that. Thousands of first time drug offenders are currently locked up in Minnesota prisons. I was one of them. I was guilty, there was no question about that. I plead guilty and as one of the terms I agreed to allocute to my crime. I spelled it all out for the prosecutor and the judge, and I added that I should be held accountable for my actions. For that, I was sentenced to 50 months. Now, I only served 15 of those in prison, the last six of which I was in boot camp. But now I'm on house arrest out here. ISR (Intense Supervised Release) is reserved for graduates of boot camp, and repeat sex offenders. I don't like being grouped in with them in ANY way. But here I am.
Here are some recent examples of how lenient judges are on sex-offenders:
Matthew John Rich, of Ramsey County touched a seven year old girl inappropriately on two occasions in 2007. He was living at his mothers house where she ran a daycare. Fortunately for the girl, the statute of limitations had not run out when she worked up the courage to speak about the incidents. He was sentenced to 21 months in prison, but the sentence was stayed and he was put on probation for 25 years. A long time, yes, but he has the chance to repeat his actions.
Thomas Lawrence Monson, a building caretaker in Mounds View, put a camera in a female Tennant's bathroom. He was charged with interfering with privacy, given one year of probation, and if he successfully completed that, the charge will be removed from his record. Good for him. I'm sure he only put the camera up for her safety.
And finally, Peter Matthew Ripka was charged with four felony counts of electronic solicitation of a child. He's 30, and engaged in sexual conversations with four girls ages 13 to 15. He asked sexually explicit questions and persuaded one of them to send him a naked picture. For all of that, he was sentenced to 90 days in jail. Fortunately for him, Judge Judith Tilsen was feeling kind and decided to let him serve that on electronic home monitoring. Don't worry though, he needs permission to use the internet, and he will be on probation for three years.
Why do sex offenders get such leniency? They may not take lives, but don't they take away dignity, pride, and a sense of safety in the world? When a rapist is convicted, does the victim go back to normal life? I think not. There is fear around every corner. Hesitation with any potential partner. And years of recovery in therapy. In a way, that is taking a life. Certainly it is taking away happiness from a life.
I've learned a lot over the last 18 months. My incarceration will have an ever lasting effect on me in every decision I make. So why not send sex offenders to prison more often? Maybe, just maybe, it might break them like it broke me. And only from there could I build myself back up.
