Oh wonderful. Rs mom provided an update, she talked to the neighbor and they are NOT dating. They dated briefly a while back and he is now stalking her. So ok maybe this is just temporary after all now that the whole neighborhood is invested in running this guy off. Ughhhhhh.
How unfortunate for R. I guess that is why he is not legally allowed in her house. Goodness. I hope the neighborhood can run him off. Hopefully the police can put someone out there for a while. Hopefully R is okay.
R is my sons friend, the ex girlfriend being stalked lives across the street from R so R is ok. I'm not sure what the neighbors name is, it seems she does have kids though. I sure feel bad for her!
Post by aliciabella on Jan 30, 2020 13:33:17 GMT -5
How exactly does this father have this guy's name in the first place? None this makes sense honestly. And, I am assuming all of this information came from this dad?
Listen, protect your kid but I also hate this neighborhood shit where you truly don't know what the truth is?
How exactly does this father have this guy's name in the first place? None this makes sense honestly. And, I am assuming all of this information came from this dad?
Listen, protect your kid but I also hate this neighborhood shit where you truly don't know what the truth is?
Ten bucks the van guy is black, lol.
I mentioned up thread that he has a friend that is a PI. He got the registration record of the car from the license plate.
It sounds like R’s dad is on top of shit, I would be grateful for that at least.
I’m the strictest parent in my neighbourhood, but our houses are far apart, we live on a creek, and we’re surrounded by woods. I think most other parents here are legit negligent lol so grain of salt. We use 2 way radios with our kid (just turned 9) when she’s playing outside (we actually always have them in case we’re separated, remember i said I’m anal lol). I always have her in eyesight unless she’s in someone’s house (she’s only allowed in two of them and parents text each other when they’re coming/going). We give her more freedom in other places; our town has walk only plaza downtown, with all the shops/restaurant/bars around it, and she can run freely out there if we’re having dinner somewhere or whatever. Some of her friends live in more kid friendly areas and I’m ok with her following their parents different rules about boundaries etc.
In your case I would lock it down in the neighbourhood. I wouldn’t take any risks with my child as long as that woman lived there and there was a chance this guy would keep returning. I know there’s the likelihood of predators lurking everywhere but why take chances with a known risk?
Um, did anyone call the police? I am thinking that this guy, if he is indeed a sex offender, can't be sitting in a van near a park or a day care!! Also, maybe his ex should get a restraining order. Sounds like a really bad situation.
I would definitely be walking my kid around and supervising until this situation is resolved. As an 80's kid, I usually like to tend towards free range (although less free range than we were!), but not with a sex offender in a van hanging out!
Um, did anyone call the police? I am thinking that this guy, if he is indeed a sex offender, can't be sitting in a van near a park or a day care!! Also, maybe his ex should get a restraining order. Sounds like a really bad situation.
I would definitely be walking my kid around and supervising until this situation is resolved. As an 80's kid, I usually like to tend towards free range (although less free range than we were!), but not with a sex offender in a van hanging out!
From the OP "When the police are called, the guy leaves before the cops can get here so it's assumed he has a scanner."
Do you know how old the victim or whether it was a violent situation? I am not saying that this makes anything more or less of a crime but if at 34 he was "dating" a girl under 18 and that is what the crime was then I would feel a lot different about the risk to my kid than if it was a little kid or if it was a violent situation.
Anyway, if he is a level 3 sex offender, I assume that he can not hang out in a van while kids are nearby? That seems like a violation of some sort, so I would check in with the police for that. He may not legally be allowed in the house because your neighbor may have a child.
I dont know yet but I expect more info to come out over the next few days with people digging into this. The offense on the registry says "criminal sexual conduct assault with intent to commit sexual penetration". Its 750.520G1 in Michigan.
Actually I think I'm wrong about the victim being a child. I'm not seeing it stated anywhere in the convo, I think I maybe assumed that because they mentioned he cannot loiter within 1000 feet of a school (there's a school nearby). I looked up the criminal code and it looks like it is not listed under crimes against children so his victim would be someone over 18 I think.
This is the shit I am talking about. This is NOT a crime against a kid. Seriously. There are big differences and without knowing the backstory and what he actually plead to, this is ridiculous. You all took this father's word that he was a convicted child molester so come on. Be more cautious if you feel that is necessary but let's not fucking go nuts about information that you are getting second and third hand, which is clearly what is occurring. White people.
How exactly does this father have this guy's name in the first place? None this makes sense honestly. And, I am assuming all of this information came from this dad?
Listen, protect your kid but I also hate this neighborhood shit where you truly don't know what the truth is?
Ten bucks the van guy is black, lol.
I mentioned up thread that he has a friend that is a PI. He got the registration record of the car from the license plate.
He's not, he is white.
Right. That doesn't mean shit. Cars can be registered to multiple people under different names and I hate to point it out but THOSE ARE NOT CHARGES AGAINST A CHILD. The case you listed is completely different. That's set up bells, like maybe these people don't know what they are talking about? The hearsay here is killing me.
I dont know yet but I expect more info to come out over the next few days with people digging into this. The offense on the registry says "criminal sexual conduct assault with intent to commit sexual penetration". Its 750.520G1 in Michigan.
Actually I think I'm wrong about the victim being a child. I'm not seeing it stated anywhere in the convo, I think I maybe assumed that because they mentioned he cannot loiter within 1000 feet of a school (there's a school nearby). I looked up the criminal code and it looks like it is not listed under crimes against children so his victim would be someone over 18 I think.
This is the shit I am talking about. This is NOT a crime against a kid. Seriously. There are big differences and without knowing the backstory and what he actually plead to, this is ridiculous. You all took this father's word that he was a convicted child molester so come on. Be more cautious if you feel that is necessary but let's not fucking go nuts about information that you are getting second and third hand, which is clearly what is occurring. White people.
If you read what you quoted, I said that IIIIII got that wrong. Not that the father said that. He had the registry listing and I misinterpreted because of convo about proximity to the school.
Neighbor guy has also spoken to the guy in the van, and he says the picture matches the registry and the name matches the car registration.
This is the shit I am talking about. This is NOT a crime against a kid. Seriously. There are big differences and without knowing the backstory and what he actually plead to, this is ridiculous. You all took this father's word that he was a convicted child molester so come on. Be more cautious if you feel that is necessary but let's not fucking go nuts about information that you are getting second and third hand, which is clearly what is occurring. White people.
If you read what you quoted, I said that IIIIII got that wrong. Not that the father said that. He had the registry listing and I misinterpreted because of convo about proximity to the school.
I still don't understand the issue then? The crime wasn't against children, he served his sentence and it is still secondhand information. Please. Go look on Meghan's law website and see how many live around you now. You will be shocked. I still don't understand what this guy did?
Not all Meghan's law defendanta have bans against being near schools, or children or a park.
If you read what you quoted, I said that IIIIII got that wrong. Not that the father said that. He had the registry listing and I misinterpreted because of convo about proximity to the school.
I still don't understand the issue then? The crime wasn't against children, he served his sentence and it is still secondhand information. Please. Go look on Meghan's law website and see how many live around you now. You will be shocked. I still don't understand what this guy did?
Not all Meghan's law defendanta have bans against being near schools, or children or a park.
I mean....at a minimum he's stalking one of CurlyQ284's neighbors?
CurlyQ284, I think you're right to be cautious. Follow your gut and tighten up on how much leniency you give your kid for now. Hopefully your neighbor can get a restraining order and the guy will buzz off and you can loosen the reigns a bit later.
If you read what you quoted, I said that IIIIII got that wrong. Not that the father said that. He had the registry listing and I misinterpreted because of convo about proximity to the school.
I still don't understand the issue then? The crime wasn't against children, he served his sentence and it is still secondhand information. Please. Go look on Meghan's law website and see how many live around you now. You will be shocked. I still don't understand what this guy did?
Not all Meghan's law defendanta have bans against being near schools, or children or a park.
I just realized it wasn't a child *while* this thread was going, so I apologize I got it wrong. I'm more than happy to delete it now that it's not a child issue if that's what you would like.
Post by icedcoffee on Jan 30, 2020 13:58:33 GMT -5
Also---this is probably overkill and I know nothing about this technology, but I'd be worried if the guy has a scanner he might be able to hear walkie-talkies so I might not use those for a little while.
I still don't understand the issue then? The crime wasn't against children, he served his sentence and it is still secondhand information. Please. Go look on Meghan's law website and see how many live around you now. You will be shocked. I still don't understand what this guy did?
Not all Meghan's law defendanta have bans against being near schools, or children or a park.
I mean....at a minimum he's stalking one of CurlyQ284's neighbors?
CurlyQ284, I think you're right to be cautious. Follow your gut and tighten up on how much leniency you give your kid for now. Hopefully your neighbor can get a restraining order and the guy will buzz off and you can loosen the reigns a bit later.
Yeah, the neighbor gave details on what he has been doing to her that I didn't post here but it's still concerning and now I'm at least glad that the neighborhood is involved to help her out.
I still don't understand the issue then? The crime wasn't against children, he served his sentence and it is still secondhand information. Please. Go look on Meghan's law website and see how many live around you now. You will be shocked. I still don't understand what this guy did?
Not all Meghan's law defendanta have bans against being near schools, or children or a park.
I mean....at a minimum he's stalking one of CurlyQ284's neighbors?
CurlyQ284, I think you're right to be cautious. Follow your gut and tighten up on how much leniency you give your kid for now. Hopefully your neighbor can get a restraining order and the guy will buzz off and you can loosen the reigns a bit later.
Says the woman who allegedly talked to the other woman who then got back to her? The whisper down the lane shit is seriously heavy here. She thought he was a child molester so it is quite possibly all of this is nothing.
If they choose to keep their child closer then that is their right, but come on, seriously, there are a lot of conclusions in here and none that are the direct source.
It kinda reminds me of my favorite Twilight Zone episode where the aliens literally just turned off the street lights and the humans did the rest with accusations and murder.
For the last time I AM THE ONE who made the mistake about the victim. Which I have now said 3 times? I misread the charge on the registry when I read it last night and when I went back to look at it during this thread I realized my mistake and admitted it.
I mean....at a minimum he's stalking one of CurlyQ284 's neighbors?
CurlyQ284 , I think you're right to be cautious. Follow your gut and tighten up on how much leniency you give your kid for now. Hopefully your neighbor can get a restraining order and the guy will buzz off and you can loosen the reigns a bit later.
Says the woman who allegedly talked to the other woman who then got back to her? The whisper down the lane shit is seriously heavy here. She thought he was a child molester so it is quite possibly all of this is nothing.
If they choose to keep their child closer then that is their right, but come on, seriously, there are a lot of conclusions in here and none that are the direct source.
It kinda reminds me of my favorite Twilight Zone episode where the aliens literally just turned off the street lights and the humans did the rest with accusations and murder.
CurlyQ284 has clarified a few times that her woman neighbor is NOT the one who said he was a child molester. OP mistakenly assumed that and has since retracted that. I don't know...from what OP has said R's parents seem like reliable reporters with a level head. I don't really get the sense that this is a bad game of telephone.
I still don't understand the issue then? The crime wasn't against children, he served his sentence and it is still secondhand information. Please. Go look on Meghan's law website and see how many live around you now. You will be shocked. I still don't understand what this guy did?
Not all Meghan's law defendanta have bans against being near schools, or children or a park.
I just realized it wasn't a child *while* this thread was going, so I apologize I got it wrong. I'm more than happy to delete it now that it's not a child issue if that's what you would like.
But, this is my exact point! You thought for awhile at least that his crimes were against a child because you must have "misunderstood" what he was saying, until just now? This whisper down the lane can be dangerous and unjust and again, dangerous.
Keep your kid closer if you feel, that is okay, but I am just trying to point that shit gets tangled from one person to the other and can't awesome be trusted as fact. That's all.
Post by icedcoffee on Jan 30, 2020 14:09:13 GMT -5
Sex offender or not if there's a mystery man in a van on my street for hours at a time multiple times I'm going to keep my kid closer to home. Not sorry.
I still don't understand the issue then? The crime wasn't against children, he served his sentence and it is still secondhand information. Please. Go look on Meghan's law website and see how many live around you now. You will be shocked. I still don't understand what this guy did?
Not all Meghan's law defendanta have bans against being near schools, or children or a park.
Is there a reason you are going to bat for the sex offender (yes - only against an adult) who is stalking her neighbor?
This feels a little like the incident back in the old place. Where not wanting your kid to play at a sex offender's house was some sort of taboo that got people riled up - until it turned out someone's own sex registered husband was looking at child porn and the board exploded.
Yes! I love sending my kids to child Meghan's law offenders, I do it often
I just realized it wasn't a child *while* this thread was going, so I apologize I got it wrong. I'm more than happy to delete it now that it's not a child issue if that's what you would like.
But, this is my exact point! You thought for awhile at least that his crimes were against a child because you must have "misunderstood" what he was saying, until just now? This whisper down the lane can be dangerous and unjust and again, dangerous.
Keep your kid closer if you feel, that is okay, but I am just trying to point that shit gets tangled from one person to the other and can't awesome be trusted as fact. That's all.
No, not from what he said. He showed the registry listing. He did not offer commentary regarding the charges. I misread it.
For the last time I AM THE ONE who made the mistake about the victim. Which I have now said 3 times? I misread the charge on the registry when I read it last night and when I went back to look at it during this thread I realized my mistake and admitted it.
No you didn't. You said you misunderstood what was told to you by that husband. There is a difference. You believed what he said until you looked it up. That was my point, again, that the whisper down the lane can be dangerous and just straight up wrong information.
For the last time I AM THE ONE who made the mistake about the victim. Which I have now said 3 times? I misread the charge on the registry when I read it last night and when I went back to look at it during this thread I realized my mistake and admitted it.
No you didn't. You said you misunderstood what was told to you by that husband. There is a difference. You believed what he said until you looked it up. That was my point, again, that the whisper down the lane can be dangerous and just straight up wrong information.
This is literally what I said upthread:
Actually I think I'm wrong about the victim being a child. I'm not seeing it stated anywhere in the convo, I think I maybe assumed that because they mentioned he cannot loiter within 1000 feet of a school (there's a school nearby). I looked up the criminal code and it looks like it is not listed under crimes against children so his victim would be someone over 18 I think.
A tier 3 sex offender is a person who has to register for life because their offense was especially heinous. Whether or not their victim was a child doesn’t change the fact that he is not a good person.
If I were you, I would consider calling the local sheriffs office who manages the sex offender registry and let them know about him sitting on your street and potentially stalking your neighbor. Each person has essentially a parole officer (it’s a different term that escapes me) that they have to meet with every so often or randomly. They would want to know this information and could affect change more easily than perhaps local PD.
No you didn't. You said you misunderstood what was told to you by that husband. There is a difference. You believed what he said until you looked it up. That was my point, again, that the whisper down the lane can be dangerous and just straight up wrong information.
This is literally what I said upthread:
Actually I think I'm wrong about the victim being a child. I'm not seeing it stated anywhere in the convo, I think I maybe assumed that because they mentioned he cannot loiter within 1000 feet of a school (there's a school nearby). I looked up the criminal code and it looks like it is not listed under crimes against children so his victim would be someone over 18 I think.
Yes, you assumed from the father's conversation. You misunderstood what he was saying? That is literally what I just said.
Is there a reason you are going to bat for the sex offender (yes - only against an adult) who is stalking her neighbor?
This feels a little like the incident back in the old place. Where not wanting your kid to play at a sex offender's house was some sort of taboo that got people riled up - until it turned out someone's own sex registered husband was looking at child porn and the board exploded.
Yes! I love sending my kids to child Meghan's law offenders, I do it often
Your white people are showing, fyi.....
I guess so.
It can't possibly be that my husband works with sex offenders, one of whom stalked his colleague and her kids and now brags about it to him from confinement. But yeah, it's all about race.
ETA: This is sticking in my craw because the last time there was an issue at his work, it was a client threatening to stab his coworker's toddler at daycare (located near where the client lives). The Latina coworker was told by her white lady boss that she couldn't report it to the police (WTF? Hello? Tarasoff?) because of client confidentiality. The previous incident was a white male coworker who hadn't had to register because his crime was never reported and had been swept under the rug by the church (he'd been a priest at the time it was against a minor). He had been mental health counseling people as a government employee and "mentoring" high school students in internships for over a decade when an expose came out naming him. The response? He can't be removed from working with young women and suggesting otherwise was harassment.
Actually I think I'm wrong about the victim being a child. I'm not seeing it stated anywhere in the convo, I think I maybe assumed that because they mentioned he cannot loiter within 1000 feet of a school (there's a school nearby). I looked up the criminal code and it looks like it is not listed under crimes against children so his victim would be someone over 18 I think.
Yes, you assumed from the father's conversation. You misunderstood what he was saying? That is literally what I just said.
No, you're blaming the dad up the street. You said "You believed what he said until you looked it up."
I'm saying it's entirely my fault. He shared the registry listing. I read it came away thinking it was a minor. I'm not sure if it's because I looked up Tier 3 and the first listing says child victim and I freaked out, or if I thought I saw it say minor on the listing, or because there was talk about school proximity. I'm just saying its 100% my fault, I don't think the neighbor dad did anything wrong.