Sex offenders sue to get computers back

Four people being treated in Minnesota's sex offender program in St. Peter and Moose Lake are suing to get their computers back. Full Story
First Prev
of 5
Next Last
Josh P

Saint Paul, MN

#1 Mar 25, 2008
Tough crap. Live with it. Ya'll did it to yourselves.
Jody Czaro

Minneapolis, MN

#2 Mar 25, 2008
I don't condone the actions of Sex Offenders nor support them, but this case is about Patient Rights. The people in the program at St. Peter are not inmates, they are patients, while those at Moose Lake Correctional Facility are inmates. So I am only speaking of the Patient Rights aspect here.

They were quoted as saying, "Staff members said it has become too hard to search the computers for material the inmates aren't supposed to have. "

This is a typical Minnesota knee-jerk reaction to any problem. What's next. taking our cars away because it's too difficult to monitor drunk drivers and speeders?

Our civil rights are slowly being removed for the "good of the state" - sounds like the USSR in the Fifties.

There are laws against Sex Offenders posessing Child Pornography. There are prohibitions against having weapons in Treatment Facilities. Let's stick to enforcing the laws we already have; if we can't enforce them, we shouldn't create them and give all of us a false sense of security.
BillB St Paul

Minneapolis, MN

#3 Mar 25, 2008
OK let have their puters but first chop off their hands. Do they pay for their own light bill ? If gov republican tiny timmy lets anybody in prison have a puter then he should resign right now. These people are behind bars to be punished for what they were convicted. They are bad people. They probably get to comment in here about how bad the food is too.
a MN State Attorney

Minneapolis, MN

#6 Mar 25, 2008
You are all missing the point. The case is not about sex offenders, it is about the rights of those either committed to or incarcerated in a State institution against their will.

How would you feel if you were arrested for DWI, then found out you couldn't have any clothing, a toothbrush, or toilet tissue? I'd bet you'd start a ruckus yourselves. The point is, the ISSUE is the same; what property a person may have in their posession.

Stay focused on the issue and rule of law, people, I know it's hard, but you can do it if you try.
bill

United States

#7 Mar 25, 2008
these are criminals - they should have nothing but a cell and a toliet. When are we going to make jail/prision punishment and not vacation.
bill

United States

#8 Mar 25, 2008
Jody - you idiot having a computer is not a civil right. They are prisioners they committed a crime and their sentance was just therapy instead of hard time.
Drew Down

Hopkins, MN

#9 Mar 25, 2008
"Rights"?! I must have failed to note where in the Constitution it said that convicted sex offenders have an unalienable right to a PC.
BillB St Paul

Minneapolis, MN

#10 Mar 25, 2008
note to Jody Crazo....." NOT INMATES " ??? how about " IN Patient " ? or residents ? how about consumers of state services? If these poor buggers have to do more than two years for some wild game they had with a baby or whoever, then I say stop that long term stuff just take em out and shoot em. and I am a very liberal guy..
Ghost of Christmas Future

Sylmar, CA

#11 Mar 25, 2008
a MN State Attorney wrote:
You are all missing the point. The case is not about sex offenders, it is about the rights of those either committed to or incarcerated in a State institution against their will.
How would you feel if you were arrested for DWI, then found out you couldn't have any clothing, a toothbrush, or toilet tissue? I'd bet you'd start a ruckus yourselves. The point is, the ISSUE is the same; what property a person may have in their posession.
Stay focused on the issue and rule of law, people, I know it's hard, but you can do it if you try.
Do you have ANY idea what you're asking the readers of this newspaper to do? You're asking them to think! You're asking for a true miracle and, I hate to be the one to break the news to you, God gave up on these idiots the moment this newspaper came up with an online edition!

“Karaoke & DJ”

Since: Feb 08

Rosemount, MN

#12 Mar 25, 2008
a MN State Attorney wrote:
You are all missing the point. The case is not about sex offenders, it is about the rights of those either committed to or incarcerated in a State institution against their will.
How would you feel if you were arrested for DWI, then found out you couldn't have any clothing, a toothbrush, or toilet tissue? I'd bet you'd start a ruckus yourselves. The point is, the ISSUE is the same; what property a person may have in their posession.
Stay focused on the issue and rule of law, people, I know it's hard, but you can do it if you try.
Sex offenders should not have computers. My wife received a call from the FBI when she was a child. A sex offender was found to have numerous files regarding her including newspaper clippings, address, phone number, etc...

Anyone convicted and incarcerated for any crime should not be allowed access to computers. It's just a way that they can track their past or potential future victims.

And it is very easy to hide files on a computer. You dig them into the c:\Program Files\ directory well enough and no one will find them. I agree with them, it's too hard to make sure that these computers stay clean. Not to mention the staffing it would take to monitor emails would be outrageous. Block access to emails? good luck! There are more email services out there than you can count and it would be incredibly easy to have someone set up another email server to get around blocks or even to set it up themselves from the inside if they have access to a credit card.

No, anyone incarcerated for crimes (especially sex offenders) should **NOT** have access to computers.
Montyman

United States

#13 Mar 25, 2008
Dear MN State Attorney:
The analogy you make comparing sex offenders and personal computers with DUI offenders and clothes is so off base it makes me wonder how in God's name you ever passed the bar (law school I can understand), heh. How about comparing the instant issue to the rights of DUI offenders to have personal stills in their cells? That would be a bit more accurate of an analogy. Let me know when your next oral argument is scheduled, I need some laughs.
Tired of it all

Saint Paul, MN

#14 Mar 25, 2008
Boy I hope they get to keep the big screen LCD TV and DVD players at least. They need to watch porn on something if the PCs are off limits.

What's next a personal attendant. Mints on the down turned bed before bedtime.

Maybe we can bring "professionals" in for them to "discuss" their fantasies with.

And tax money is wasted on this type of litigation. Glad to be in America.
sick of it all

Palo Alto, CA

#15 Mar 25, 2008
To all those who think these animals have a right to computers, how would you all feel if it was your children or family members these wastes of human life are downloading and wacking off too?
COMMON SENSE

Minneapolis, MN

#16 Mar 25, 2008
Jody Czaro wrote:
I don't condone the actions of Sex Offenders nor support them, but this case is about Patient Rights. The people in the program at St. Peter are not inmates, they are patients, while those at Moose Lake Correctional Facility are inmates. So I am only speaking of the Patient Rights aspect here.
They were quoted as saying, "Staff members said it has become too hard to search the computers for material the inmates aren't supposed to have. "
This is a typical Minnesota knee-jerk reaction to any problem. What's next. taking our cars away because it's too difficult to monitor drunk drivers and speeders?
Our civil rights are slowly being removed for the "good of the state" - sounds like the USSR in the Fifties.
There are laws against Sex Offenders posessing Child Pornography. There are prohibitions against having weapons in Treatment Facilities. Let's stick to enforcing the laws we already have; if we can't enforce them, we shouldn't create them and give all of us a false sense of security.
I hope you are kidding....it clearly states that they are using them to research porn, children, and maps of the grounds....they committed unspeakable crimes, and are now obviously using the computer to further thier desires, not curb them. What's "typically Minnesota" here is some one like you advocating for the "rights" of animals. These aren't patients, like you suggest. They are merely criminals saved from thier rightful sentence, because of the liberal society we all reside in.
Freedom

Duluth, MN

#17 Mar 25, 2008
Since when is it a 'right' to have a computer in prison?
Many sex offenders use computers to prey on their subjects, why let them continue to offend when incarcerated?
Billbo

Prior Lake, MN

#18 Mar 25, 2008
Yes! It only took 9 comments for someone to go for the ole "take 'em out and shoot 'em" rationale.

The Pioneer Press commenters never disappoint.
RGG

Saint Paul, MN

#19 Mar 25, 2008
a MN State Attorney wrote:
You are all missing the point. The case is not about sex offenders, it is about the rights of those either committed to or incarcerated in a State institution against their will.
How would you feel if you were arrested for DWI, then found out you couldn't have any clothing, a toothbrush, or toilet tissue? I'd bet you'd start a ruckus yourselves. The point is, the ISSUE is the same; what property a person may have in their posession.
Stay focused on the issue and rule of law, people, I know it's hard, but you can do it if you try.
I wouldn't advertise yourself as an attorney. You are just perpetuating your lousy image.

I understand there are "rights." There is a right to vote and to bear arms, but felons can't do it. In other words you forfeit your rights when you violate the responsibility for those rights. You are the reason drunk drivers are still driving. You and the rest like you are the problem here. People don't deserve rights when the violate the rights of others.
1084zapp

United States

#20 Mar 25, 2008
I thought you lost all your rights when you are charged with a crime. Maybe that is why we have so many crimes, there is no punishment.
highland guy

Saint Paul, MN

#21 Mar 25, 2008
The article is not clear...Does the patient/inmate own the computers or the Facility? I think it makes a difference.

Ahhh, imagine state-provided computers for sexual predators to cruise myspace all day long. Only in Minnesota.
Ridiculous

Lincoln, NE

#22 Mar 25, 2008
In many states (SD for one), no inmate has access to the internet. It is understood that this is one of the things you give up when you commit a crime.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Moose Lake Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Willow River Days (Jan '09) Jul '14 babs 11
Lawmakers grapple with how to reform sex offend... (Mar '14) Mar '14 Heres an Idea 1
Minn. senators: sex offender program needs change (Nov '13) Nov '13 PB in Saint Paul 1
Sex offender program reports first suicide (Aug '13) Aug '13 Jodie 1
Stay Safe: No Water Contact is Recommended in F... (Jun '13) Jun '13 Gato Is Impressed 1
phone number (Jan '13) Mar '13 curious 2
Business Offers Free Electronics Recycling for ... (Mar '13) Mar '13 Sandy 1
Moose Lake Dating
Find my Match

Moose Lake People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Moose Lake News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Moose Lake

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 1:03 pm PST

NBC Sports 1:03PM
Union questions Harold Henderson's neutrality
NBC Sports 1:37 PM
Asiata out with concussion for Vikings vs. Packers - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 1:37 PM
Asiata out with concussion for Vikings vs. Packers - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 1:58 PM
Packers LB Matthews probable against Vikings - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 1:58 PM
Packers LB Matthews probable against Vikings - NBC Sports