Zach Anderson's sex offender sentence vacated

[redheadbaker]

He is the kid who was convicted for having sex with a minor who registered on a dating app and lied about her age (and admitted as much in court).

6abc.com/news/19-year-old-registered-sex-offender-has-sentence-vacated/974624/

19-YEAR-OLD REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER HAS SENTENCE VACATED

Tuesday, September 08, 2015 07:23PM

Zach Anderson, an Indiana teen who was ordered to spend the next 25 years on the state sex offender registry, had his criminal sexual conduct sentence vacated today.

Judge Dennis Wiley, the same judge who sentenced Anderson after he pleaded guilty, granted the motion brought by Anderson's legal team for a re-sentencing, the Berrian County Court told ABC News' "Nightline" today. In granting the motion, Wiley recused himself from the case. A bond hearing is scheduled for this Friday, his father Lester Anderson told "Nightline" today.

Another judge will be selected for the re-sentencing of the case. Anderson's probation officer told him this morning that he is not currently on probation since the sentence was vacated.

Anderson is still on the sex offender registry in both Michigan and Indiana, but his parents "are confident that this is a step in the right direction of Zach being taken off the sex offender registry entirely."

"This is definitely a step in the right direction," Lester Anderson told "Nightline."

"Nightline" profiled the 19-year-old's case and his family's fight to clear his name in July before his appeal hearing. His story went viral, with thousands of comments pouring in on Twitter, Facebook and Reddit.

As a convicted sex offender, Anderson faces notably strict probation. For the next five years, he is forbidden from owning a smartphone or using the Internet. He is not allowed to talk to anyone younger than 17, other than immediate family. He is banned from going to any establishment that serves alcohol and he has to be home before 8 p.m. every night.

Because he is not allowed to use a computer, his budding career in computer science is now shuttered. He will be listed on the sex offender registry until 2040.

Anderson's story began last winter when he drove from his home in Elkhart, Indiana, to Niles, Michigan, a town 20 miles away, to meet up with a girl he had met on the dating app "Hot or Not."

The girl later admitted to police and testified in court at Anderson's sentencing hearing that she had lied about her age and told Anderson she was 17. She was really 14. The age of consent in Michigan is 16. The girl had also registered on the "adults" section of the dating app.

"[She] was actually the first person I had met up with or anything from that," Anderson told "Nightline" in a previous interview. "I had asked her when we were messaging. I said, 'How old are you?' And then she had told me 17 ... I just got out of high school. So it's two years difference. I didn't think that was a big deal or anything."

After they connected, Anderson, saying he thought he was talking to a 17-year-old, said they flirted through text messages and arranged to meet. Anderson picked her up and the two drove to a playground in Niles, where they had sex.

Unbeknown to them, the girl's mother had called police that night because she thought her daughter was missing. Two months later, detectives showed up at Anderson's job at a mechanic shop.

Anderson eventually pleaded guilty to fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct. Despite the then-14-year-old girl and her mother testifying on his behalf, saying the sex was consensual and the girl had lied about her age, the judge in the first trial sentenced Anderson to 90 days in jail and ordered him to register as a sex offender.

Making matters worse, Michigan, where the crime occurred, is a state that does not provide an automatic defense if the victim lies about her age.

Convicted sex offenders are forbidden from visiting any public areas where there might be children, so Anderson also wasn't allowed to live in his parents' house because it was 800 feet of a public boat ramp, just shy of the 1,000-foot distance minimum.

His parents were forced to dip into their savings for legal fees and to buy him a fixer-upper home on the other side of town that met the distance requirement.

In their efforts to clear their son's name, the Anderson family hopes their fight will help others in similar situations.

"We hope that they stop putting people on the sex offender registry like they're passing out traffic tickets," Zach Anderson's mother, Amanda Anderson, told "Nightline" in an earlier interview. "There are hundreds and hundreds of people that don't deserve to be on that list, and it's supposed to be a safeguard for the community. And instead, they're just publicly shaming these people and our son for life."

[ttt]

Good. This is not someone who belongs on the sex offender registry (which is a terrible idea in the first place, but that's another discussion).

[jeaniebueller]

I don't know if I am missing something, but I don't see how he isn't going to be put on the SOR again just based on what he pled guilty to. In MI, to not be put on the SOR for that type of conviction, there has to be less than a 4 year age gap between the parties.

[Elsa]

Whoa.

Is not using the internet/having a smart phone standard for new additions to the SOR?

And are we asking our young men to ask for age verification when they want to have sex with a woman? This girl admits to portraying herself as a 17yo, as does her mother. I mean, obv lets be teaching our kids to not have sex with someone they just met and don't know anything about...but it sounds like they had been talking a while online, so I'm sure he felt like he *knew* her.

IDK. I feel bad for the guy.

[meltoine]

Sept 9, 2015 8:18:05 GMT -5 redheadbaker said:

 The girl had also registered on the "adults" section of the dating app.

Is there some other section for "not-adults"? WTF?

[stephogirl]

Good. Reason prevails.

[penguingrrl]

Good. This wasn't a case of a malicious guy out trolling for underage girls.

[jeaniebueller]

Sept 9, 2015 8:37:12 GMT -5 Elsa said:

Whoa.

Is not using the internet/having a smart phone standard for new additions to the SOR?

its a pretty standard term of probation if you use a computer to commit a crime.

[bears]

Sept 9, 2015 9:58:59 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

Sept 9, 2015 8:37:12 GMT -5 Elsa said:

Whoa.

Is not using the internet/having a smart phone standard for new additions to the SOR?

its a pretty standard term of probation if you use a computer to commit a crime.

I think that's really damaging in this day and age. It eliminates most jobs and schooling.

[jeaniebueller]

Sept 9, 2015 10:35:50 GMT -5 bears said:

Sept 9, 2015 9:58:59 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

its a pretty standard term of probation if you use a computer to commit a crime.

I think that's really damaging in this day and age. It eliminates most jobs and schooling.

Sure, but again, think about the cases where adults are targeting young teenagers/children using their computer, distributing child pornography, etc. They can't police how they use the internet, its just easier to say no computers period.

[penguingrrl]

Sept 9, 2015 12:43:06 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

Sept 9, 2015 10:35:50 GMT -5 bears said:

I think that's really damaging in this day and age. It eliminates most jobs and schooling.

Sure, but again, think about the cases where adults are targeting young teenagers/children using their computer, distributing child pornography, etc. They can't police how they use the internet, its just easier to say no computers period.

Honestly, given that every job I know of (from professional positions to hourly employees at Target and Walmart) uses an online application system a rule that you can't use a computer at all is then prohibiting you from working. The last time I tried to apply for a job in person (at the Gap in 2010) I was referred to the online system as the only way they accept applications. If we're going to put so many restrictions on someone that they can't get a job then they need to be in jail. Either you're a danger to society and should be in jail or you're not.

[jeaniebueller]

Sept 9, 2015 12:48:07 GMT -5 penguingrrl said:

Sept 9, 2015 12:43:06 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

Sure, but again, think about the cases where adults are targeting young teenagers/children using their computer, distributing child pornography, etc. They can't police how they use the internet, its just easier to say no computers period.

Honestly, given that every job I know of (from professional positions to hourly employees at Target and Walmart) uses an online application system a rule that you can't use a computer at all is then prohibiting you from working. The last time I tried to apply for a job in person (at the Gap in 2010) I was referred to the online system as the only way they accept applications. If we're going to put so many restrictions on someone that they can't get a job then they need to be in jail. Either you're a danger to society and should be in jail or you're not.

Fair enough. As an aside as well, if you have any type of felony conviction (or certain misdemeanors), you also aren't even going to get a foot in the door at any of the big box corporate employers to begin with, which is a whole other can of worms.

[penguingrrl]

Sept 9, 2015 12:52:06 GMT -5 jeaniebueller said:

Sept 9, 2015 12:48:07 GMT -5 penguingrrl said:

Honestly, given that every job I know of (from professional positions to hourly employees at Target and Walmart) uses an online application system a rule that you can't use a computer at all is then prohibiting you from working. The last time I tried to apply for a job in person (at the Gap in 2010) I was referred to the online system as the only way they accept applications. If we're going to put so many restrictions on someone that they can't get a job then they need to be in jail. Either you're a danger to society and should be in jail or you're not.

Fair enough. As an aside as well, if you have any type of felony conviction (or certain misdemeanors), you also aren't even going to get a foot in the door at any of the big box corporate employers to begin with, which is a whole other can of worms.

That is true and incredibly problematic. I have a cousin who is a lawyer and does a lot of work helping former inmates from Rikers gain employment after release and talks a lot about that issue. But even if you can't get in with a big corporation, even mom and pop operations generally seem to advertise on CL or their own website these days.

As a whole it seems like our society makes it nearly impossible to return to normalcy once you've been marked. Starting with stories of police being called for misbehavior in K, going into the school to prison pipeline and ending with companies refusing to hire you with a record. Of course recidivism is high if you can't get gainful employment.

[lyssbobiss, Command, B613]

Good. That judge was on some sort of morality crusade and this kid did not deserve that guy's misdirected anger.