ILNews

Pence signs into law changes to sex offender registry

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Changes are coming to Indiana’s sex offender registry, thanks to a new law signed by Gov. Mike Pence Thursday.

HEA 1053 requires the Indiana Department of Correction to remove information from the online public portal of the sex offender registry relating to a sex or violent offender who no longer is required to register or is deceased. The new law also adds the vehicle identification number of the vehicle owned or regularly operated by the offender to the information he or she is required to provide for sex offender registration. Driver’s licenses or ID cards must contain the offender’s current address and physical description.

Among other things, the law also merges the offense of criminal deviate conduct into the crime of rape and repeals the criminal deviate conduct statute, effective July 1, 2014.

The introduced version of the bill was prepared by the Criminal Law and Sentencing Policy Study Committee.

Pence also signed HEA 1159, which limits the liability of a public school or an accredited nonpublic school that provides community-use physical fitness activities to the general public.

The governor still has dozens of enrolled acts before him with a signing or veto deadline of Saturday, including HEA 1393 on judicial technology and automation and HEA 1320 on workers’ compensation.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Second chance
    I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.
  • want to move from texas
    im 27 and was charged and sent to prison for 4 years in texas served my time for a indececy to a child she was 14 and she saw me naked now i have to register for a lifetime here and i heard that for people moving from another state to indiana would only have to register for a certain amount of time and the they would be done. My charge is 8 years old and im not a bad guy just made bad choises and now i have to live with them my girlfriend lives in indiana and i want to move there to be with her but i dont want this registration thing to get in my way. JUST A WARNING DONT MOVE TO TEXAS IF YOU HAVE A SEX CASE THEY WILL HANG YOU!!!!
  • Leaving Illinois due to similar situations
    I currently live just across the state line in Illinois and am going through some of the same situations over here. I have been in many relationships since getting my offense in 2003 which have ended due to my charge. In Illinois, they classify ALL sex offenders in the same category. Most, if not all, of my relationships have ended and I have lost my rights to my children because of all this. I am right now trying to find out the laws regarding a sex offender living with kids in many states. I am not a violent person. My case in Indiana would be classified as a Class D felony. I just want to live in peace with my family and my loved ones without all the bull I deal with in Illinois. So if you're looking for a place to live in peace with a loved one or other family, ILLINOIS IS NOT IT!!!!! Avoid Illinois at all costs!!! Hopefully this helps prevent others from going through what I'm going through. So if someone can give me some insight on where i can live with my family and any future kids my fiance and I decide to have (if any), please don't hesitate to let me know.
  • Same situation
    If you don't mind me asking what state did you move your family to, my family is going through the same situation.
  • From An Ex-Sex Offender
    Charged with Child Exploitation-Dismissed by the Judge, Listed on my Arrest record as Guilty, cause a woman pen pal traced her breast for me whom over the age of 18 in 11 years ago, now in her 40 years. I am 57. That's Indiana justice. I have never photographed any woman sexually.
  • mark up
    People who molest children, and that includes pubescent minors, but the perverts who do that, should be thankful for the mercy of the sex offender registry. There are other just punishments which could be meted out to them which would "mark them for life" in a far more definite manner.
  • Shower Needed
    A "passionate choice"? Sexual Misconduct with a Minor only applies to 14 and 15 year old children. Calling a 15 year old an "older teenager" is like calling a 2009 Taurus a "new car". Sure, you are only fudging by a couple of years - but those years make a difference.
  • Non violent sex offenders doomed to fail
    According to Indiana laws dumping men who have consensual sex with an older teen with rapist and violent offenders dooms them to fail. They are forced to live in substandard neighborhoods with questionable people and are considered dangerous when seeking employment in the job market. One passionate choice marks them for life even if they only have to register for 10 years, plus they are harassed by the local law officials.
    • get a lawyer dude
      GET A LAWYER AND DONT POST DETAILS ABOUT YOUR CASE ONLINE!
    • were to live
      hi im going to soon be a sex offender the cops came raided my house on a gun charge ott my computer and on one file of a EX girl friend that was 15 when i took it and now is over 18 i was charge with child porn i didnt know i still had the pic but while i was in jail my 1st court date i was handed a new charge of the child porn now idk what to do i have just about beating everything else but tho my drop other charge on violating my rights they will not drop this and idk what im going to do from know on there saying i will be a level one but idk were i could live still to have a life and not be run out of town i already be run out of my home town of almost 20 yrs and i have not even been chared yet
      • Forced to leave Indiana
        I think Indiana is one of the worst states because of how they treat sex offenders. I am a married man with four children and my job was constantly harassed due to people looking at their neighborhood on the registry and they could see that I worked nearby in a factory. The HR department head employee personally told me people were calling. My question is just why does someone need to know where I work other than the police? All that did was open me for harassment. I eventually received a Bachelors degree and it was hard to get a job for the fact the businesses knew I would appear on a map above their building. In the end I moved my family to another state where they dont put your face or mention where you work and I went from having to report every 3 months to just once a year. Even the police here said it was stupid to show where I worked because the business could face harassment and that I still had to work to feed my family regardless of being on the registry. In the end, I am glad I left Indiana and will never return to that extremely hateful state.
        • Larger picture
          Wouldn't it be beneficial to change the laws to give those that are not a "threat" to society a chance to rebuild their lives. Se offenders should be classified under the severity of their crime, not pooled together. To classify these individuals, it would give hope to making a difference and becoming a "normal" person in the community. To label all of them the same, gives a negative effect on everything they do. Since laws are beginning to change, why not consider the ones that would make a real difference in the lives of many.

          Post a comment to this story

          COMMENTS POLICY
          We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
           
          You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
           
          Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
           
          No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
           
          We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
           

          Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

          Sponsored by
          ADVERTISEMENT
          Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
          1. Applause, applause, applause ..... but, is this duty to serve the constitutional order not much more incumbent upon the State, whose only aim is to be pure and unadulterated justice, than defense counsel, who is also charged with gaining a result for a client? I agree both are responsible, but it seems to me that the government attorneys bear a burden much heavier than defense counsel .... "“I note, much as we did in Mechling v. State, 16 N.E.3d 1015 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans. denied, that the attorneys representing the State and the defendant are both officers of the court and have a responsibility to correct any obvious errors at the time they are committed."

          2. Do I have to hire an attorney to get co-guardianship of my brother? My father has guardianship and my older sister was his co-guardian until this Dec 2014 when she passed and my father was me to go on as the co-guardian, but funds are limit and we need to get this process taken care of quickly as our fathers health isn't the greatest. So please advise me if there is anyway to do this our self or if it requires a lawyer? Thank you

          3. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

          4. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

          5. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

          ADVERTISEMENT