Sex Offender Sues Every Prosecutor And Sheriff In Indiana

[Willowdared]

Sex Offender Sues Every Prosecutor In Indiana

Law Would Allow Authorities To Check Computer At Any Time

POSTED: 4:49 pm PDT April 7, 2008
UPDATED: 7:30 pm PDT April 7, 2008

SCOTT COUNTY, Ind. -- A man filed a lawsuit against every sheriff and prosecutor in the state of Indiana, Louisville station WLKY reported.

Convicted sex offender Steve Morris wants a new law, designed to protect children, thrown out.

The law that goes into effect in July would allow law enforcement to search his computer at any time.

Morris' attorney said it's a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment.
"The Civil Liberties Union is more worried about his rights than the rights of victims in southern Indiana," said Scott County Sheriff John Lizenby.

The new law will require registered sex offenders to submit e-mail addresses and log-in names for social networking Web sites like MySpace and Facebook.

It also requires offenders to install software allowing police to monitor usage.

"If we can look into their private Internet and look into what they're doing and they're contacting somebody they shouldn't be, that's going to help stop them," Lizenby said.
But Morris aims to change that.

More than a decade ago, Morris was convicted of child molestation. He, along with the ACLU, is suing Lizenby and every other sheriff and prosecutor in Indiana, challenging the state's ability to search his home and check his computer at any time.

"This kind of legislation is designed to make us feel like we're safe and give us a sense of security," said University of Louisville professor Dr. Richard Tewksbury, who has studied sex offender registries for more than a decade.

Law enforcement doesn't have the resources to monitor all offenders, and the other half of the law suggests lawmakers are naive.

"The idea that all offenders are going to provide all of their e-mail addresses, all of their screen names, and only use their personal or home computer to go onto networking sites is simply not realistic," he said.

Morris couldn't be reached for comment. His wife refused comment on the suit, only to say her husband has done his time.

"I don't have a lot of sympathy for somebody that's on that Web site and is worried about their rights," Lizenby said. "I'm more worried about the victims' rights."

ACLU attorney Ken Falk said the Supreme Court has expressly said that law enforcement cannot conduct a search without probable cause and a warrant, and that lawmakers completely ignored that.
Falk asked a judge for a temporary injunction Monday.
A hearing could come in the next few weeks.

[Ducky]

Someone put a bullet in this guy. Preferably in the empty cavity where his brain should be, with the double tap going to his nuts. Or one to the chest and one to each head.

[HudsonHawk]

I might be in the minority here, but I think that being able to search the home and computer (even a felon) at any time and with no reasonable suspicion or probable cause is an unreasonable search and seizure. Your judgement may be clouded by the fact that he is a sex offender. If he was convicted of drug possession, should police be allowed to search at any time because he might have drugs again? I can't answer dishonestly, as a cop I would love thinking of it as a "free toss", but as a free citizen I think it is unreasonable.

[Cidp24]

Grandfather it. Make it known that from this point forward, anyone convicted of such crimes are subject to such searches.

[TXCharlie]

I might be in the minority here, but I think that being able to search the home and computer (even a felon) at any time and with no reasonable suspicion or probable cause is an unreasonable search and seizure. Your judgement may be clouded by the fact that he is a sex offender. If he was convicted of drug possession, should police be allowed to search at any time because he might have drugs again? I can't answer dishonestly, as a cop I would love thinking of it as a "free toss", but as a free citizen I think it is unreasonable.

I would tend to agree, unless he is still on parole or probation - If you want the parole/proation period extended, then increase the sentance guidelines.

Who I REALLY feel sorry for though, is these 18-year-old kids who get sucked into a real relationship with a 15-year-old girlfriend, who may even go to the same high school. Usually it's the parents of the girl who press for prosecution. The 18-year-old becomes marked for life, and the girl is damaged by guilt and forced separation from quite possibly the love of her life - There are no winners in that deal, and it shouldn't be treated like a child molestation case.

[lewisipso]

It's a band-aid for an artery bleed in any sense. This type of bullshit appeases the public that doesn't know any better. Does anyone think he couldn't find another internet access somewhere?
Any group of persons who can organize this kind of shit www.nambla.org and get away with it have more than just a handfull of resourses.