Sex Offender Registry Prevents Dying, Bedridden Man From Spending Final Days at Home
"My opinion is no exceptions should be made," says the chief of the police.

The daughter of a bedridden, dying 79-year-old man asked for permission to care for him at home. This request was denied by the city council of Shenandoah, since the man is on the sex offender registry. Registrants must live at least 1,000 feet from playgrounds.
The daughter's home is 894 feet from a toddler park.
"The city council voted not to have any exceptions," City Attorney William Ferebee tells Reason.
A local ordinance adopted in 2018 established the 1,000-feet rule. The council would have to vote to amend it, according to The Courier. At a council meeting last month, the members debated what that would entail: Either they would have to give the chief of police the authority to make exceptions to the registry requirements, or they would have to grant that responsibility to themselves.
While my reading of the Texas bill regarding registries seems to require that towns "establish procedures for a registered sex offender to apply for an exemption from the ordinance," that option was not provided in Shenandoah. The chief of police, Troye Dunlap, was not eager to take on the exemption-granting role.
"My opinion is no exceptions should be made," Dunlap tells Reason. "If something were to happen, then it falls on me."
The possibility of something happening seems remote, since the man in question is confined to his bed and receiving end-of-life care. But Dunlap worries that any exception would create the possibility of future risks.
"It's like when we barricade off roads during a hurricane and someone wants to go around the barricade," he says. "If I let you in, then everyone else wants to, and everyone's going to have their reasons. You're going to have to reconsider that line for everybody."
On the other hand, there is a grand total of two people on the registry in Shenandoah.
What's more, the 1,000-foot buffer zone is itself based on two intuitive but incorrect beliefs about people on the registry: that they reoffend at a high rate, and that they victimize their neighbors. Mountains of research show that both of these beliefs are false.
According Sandy Rozek, communications director of the National Association for Rational Sex Offense Laws (NARSOL), multiple studies find no correlation between residency restrictions and protecting children.
"Here is a man with zero risk of harming a child, who wants to be with those he loves as he prepares to die," says Rozek. "To deny him this is heartless, cruel, and inhumane."
During the city council meeting, one of the members explored granting the exception. But then the others spoke about how future decisions could be more fraught. In the end, the vote was unanimous: no exceptions.
Rozek notes that there's no registry for murderers; other crimes do not result in draconian, permanent restrictions even after the sentence is served.
"Whatever he did to require sex offender registration, whether or not it involved an offense against a child, he has paid his debt for his crime," says Rozek. "That was supposed to be the end of his punishment, but being on the registry continues his punishment up to the point of death. That is just wrong."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
… but being on the registry continues his punishment up to the point of death.
His victim carries the consequences until death.
As TFA said, murderers who are released don’t have the same restrictions.
And the same "consequences until death" rationale applies to burglars, rapists, embezzlers, and used car dealers.
Their victims are dead, though.
While probably not true, sex crimes used to be called a fate worse than death.
Kind of up to the victim, isn't it? If they truly thought so, they can always commit suicide. That most don't makes it seem unlikely.
Well… Remember that at the time that phrase was popular, suicide was also religiously forbidden. You could incite someone to kill you and still get into heaven but suicides meant that you died unshriven and were forever excluded from the family of God.
So the priority of badness arguably was:
– dead at the hand of another (sad but at least you’re not a burden on your family)
– rape victim (not only the direct harm but now unmarriageable and therefore a burden on the family until death)
– suicide
Thankfully, those views are no longer common.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks ghf-82 online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link———————————————>>> http://Www.RichApp1.Com
Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK. 🙂
HERE====)> http://WWW.WORKSFUL.COM
I’ve earned $17,910 this month by working online from home. I work only six hours a day despite being a full-time college student. Everyone is capable of carrying out this work from their homes and learning it in spare time on a continuous basis.
To learn more, see this article———>>> http://Www.Salaryapp1.com
Google pays $100 per hour. My last paycheck was $3500 working 40 hours a week online. My younger brother’s friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 30 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once.
For more details visit this article.. http://www.LiveJob247.com
Within christendom there has never been a prohibition on rape victims being married. Saint Augustine of Hippo specifically addressed the topic at length in his treatise The City Of God Against The Pagans. So you're talking out of your ass, unless you're referring to the Jewish or Muslim communities.
Definitely keep going with the "If little kids don't want to be traumatized by being raped they can always kill themselves" line of kiddie fucker advocacy you disgusting piece of shit. How could anyone fail to be persuaded by such impeccable logic?
Better keep that argument away from an open flame, straw is extremely flammable.
You heard it here first folks. Buying a lemon from a shady car dealership is exactly the same as a 7 year old child being raped by a 32 year old man.
Gee I just wonder why nobody takes libertarians seriously.
I get paid over 190$ per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..
HERE====)> http://WWW.RICHSALARIES.COM
The article doesn't mention what he was on the registry for. Odds are his "victim" are his girlfriend who was a year younger than him, or the sidewalk he urinated on in public. Whenever I look at one of those registries, the majority of them are cases where there obviously wasn't a victim.
Different times, to be sure. Now, urinating on the sidewalk is a human right.
Nope; depending on the state and sometimes the circumstances, public urination can definitely get you on the registry. It is usually charged as public indecency, a registerable offense in practically every state.
And people often foolishly plead guilty to that, thinking it's a minor offense and they can get it over with, not realizing the long-term consequences.
Really? Man, how do we get that aggressive charging where I live?
He was being snarky about the cities like SF and NYC run by your Team Blue criminal justice reformers that allow people to shit, piss, fuck, and shoot up on the sidewalk with impunity you raging fucking autistic retard.
There is no 79 year old registered sex offender living in Shenandoah or any of the surrounding areas. And in order for your scenario to be true this imaginary 79 year old would have had to fuck a 16 year old girl back in 1960 when he was 17. Something tells me that's probably not what happened, but it's good to see the kiddie fucker apologist brigade leaping to action.
There is no one more hardcore on sex offenses than I am--well, maybe that's an exaggeration--I, for example, support the death penalty for rape (in certain circumstances, e.g., home invasion where a juvenile is raped). But I also think that sex offender provisions that impose duties on the offender that are not part of the original sentence are wrong. I don't know if that is the case here, but the draconian stuff is unworthy of a free society.
Yes, that is the case here. These restrictions were put in place just a few years ago and is now punishing a man and his family for something he completed his sentence for long ago. Sex offender registration is not part of the sentence; it is a consequence of the sentence, and it is a civil regulatory scheme, not a criminal scheme, yet it inflicts punishment, in many states including Texas, for life.
Bullshit. It's continued punishment based on completely bogus assumptions. These false assumptions come from hate, and not from facts. So go ahead and feel better about yourself for punishing an old, dying man. I'm sure that makes you better than the rest of us.
Don't know who you are admonishing, Dave, but I agree with you. Guess I should have said that the registry isn't "intended" to be punishment, but it is, which makes its restrictions and consequences unconstitutional.
No, he doesn't live there. That is the point.
For the vast majority of offenses for which people on the registry were convicted, that is not true. Go to the legislative site for your state and find the statutes defining registerable offenses. You will be surprised, and the offense sounds worse than the actual act may have been. "Sexual battery" could be a half-drunk guy grabbing a waitresses' bottom in a bar. And keep in mind that a significant number of people on the registry are there due to false allegations made out of spite for a breakup or to get the upper hand in a child custody battle.
You have to be convicted in court in order to be placed on the registry you stupid cunt. They don't put on the registry because your girlfriend goes to the cops and cries rape after a breakup. That's now how criminal prosecution works. It would be fucking hilarious if you got raped to death though.
It's funny because you think you're right. What I wouldn't pay to see your face when you learn the truth of how things really are.
Go on then, kiddie fucker, enlighten me. Provide even one fucking citation of a case where someone was placed on a sex offender registry without being tried and convicted of a crime. Get your greasy little kiddie-touching sausage fingers furiously pounding into Google, you brain dead pedo piece of shit.
Sir, the vast majority of these cases are settled by a plea agreement. A plea agreement is considered a conviction. Defendants plead guilty to offenses they did not commit for several reasons, but primarily because their attorneys strongly advise them to because a trial resulting in a guilty verdict would bring with it the high probability of a sentence much greater than if they plead. Would you do yourself the favor of doing a little bit of research on these issues before you continue to discuss things on which you are ill informed?
What a lovely person you are, wishing evil on another human being. In case you aren't aware, ex-girlfriends lie commonly and send innocent men to prison because we're so repulsed by sex crimes, to the point that we believe even the proven liars.
Especially since your ilk wants to piously pronounce the miracle of the rapist's spawn - and force the victim to protect it.
Gee, it's like people actually value a thing called life. Shocking revelation, isn't it?
I am sick of this narrative. Most people choose never to get over things. A person can have lifelong consequences from any other tragedy and yet we expect them to work to move on with their lives. Yet we say this about sex offenses so we can justify the inhumane treatment of those forced onto government blacklists because of America's obsession with strict regulation of sexuality. Leftists and right wing nuts alike benefit from this bad logic and the registry it inspires.
I'm glad to see Shenandoah not lifting its social distancing requirements for anyone.
Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 800$+ daily… You can earn from16000$-32000$ a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish…lli It’s a flexible job but a good eaning opportunity
This Website OPEN HERE…………..>>> onlinecareer1
One of these days the sex registry shit will finally make it to the supreme court, and will be found in violation of the Constitution. Indefinite forever punishments not allowed just because Karen feels nervous.
You're right. Kiddie fuckers like you and your butt buddies shreek and sarcasmic should be put to death upon conviction.
I think this town voted 102% for Trump.
There's zero chance any of them cast a vote that could be perceived as soft on pedophiles.
Yeah only Trumpistas are concerned about protecting children from being fucked by adults you goddamn retard. Remind me again which crime bill Trump passed? Oh that's right, he signed pro-criminal legislation that assclowns like you have been peddling for the last 20 years resulting in the largest crime increase in 40 fucking years.
It's really amazing what 4 short years of a forgettable presidency that was the most libertarian administration since Silent Cal did to people like you and sarcasmic. At least you're a lot quieter than he is.
Yeah only Trumpistas are concerned about protecting children from being fucked by adults you goddamn retard.
More than the Democrats, that’s for sure. Did you forget about California SB 145?https://www.liberty.edu/champion/2020/10/opinion-new-california-law-protecting-pedophilia-is-vile/
Trump didn’t pass anything like this. That was Newsom.
You know, I was curious to see what his offense was, to see if it was one of those situations where the 'sex offense' was something mundane (like urinating on the sidewalk as posited above) and I noticed his name was never mentioned in the article. So I clicked the linked article. His name isn't mentioned there either.
This seems... unusual. I'm literally trying to be sympathetic to this guy here, and they're not making it easy.
To me that means that the editors of the publications have at least a modicum of decency and respect for his situation, not to put information out that could lead protesters or even vigilantes to his doorstep as he lay dying.
We certainly want to make a kiddie fucker feel bad about himself.
When you retired the OBL shtick, you really should have taken up another parody account or something. The real you is so fucking unimaginably retarded it's painful.
To me it means they've gotten wise to the fact that you can uncover their dishonesty in reporting if they actually report the facts. If I cannot discern the original crime and it could be anywhere from public urination at 3am to multiple forcible rapes but they're spinning sympathy to make me think the former then it's not decency but dishonest, manipulative reporting.
His name and current location are never revealed, not to Lenore, not to the local reporter who wrote about the situation initially.
You can search the Texas sex offender registry here. There are only two registered sex offenders in all of Shenandoah: GRIMM,RICK IRA, aged 62, convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a 7 year old child in 1992, and COOK,KEVIN JAY, aged 53, convicted of possession of child pornography and promotion of child pornography in 2014. If you expand the search radius well over a mile outside of the town limits the only other registered sex offender is SWOBODA,JOHN, aged 30, convicted of sexual assault in the 2nd degree/compulsion of a 12 year old child.
In other words, this story is a fucking lie. There is no 79 year old registered sex offender anywhere in Shenandoah. And if they've mistaken him for one of the other 3 registered sex offenders in the area he's at best a child pornographer like shreek and at worst a convicted child rapist. Let's let the idiotic cunt Sandy now lecture us about the dignity of 62 year old man who raped a 7 year old little girl when he was 32.
Ummm, the article doesn't say where he currently lives, sparky...
He's dying and bedridden - just bring him home (it's not a crime to do so) and let them come pry him back out if they have the balls to.
Also, this is why you don't ask for permission.
That's how kiddie fuckers like you end up on the registry, actually.
I take that to mean you ask permission first?
I couldn't care less.
Don't ask .... Don't tell - and that goes triple when town bureaucrats and autocrats are involved.
Some of these 1000-foot rules are absurd. In my municipality, the newly very progressive town council passed a law that banned the sale of alcohol or tobacco within 1000 feet of a school. Unless you're a grocery store. Or the QT, apparently.
The town is about 1.25 square miles in area, and has 3 schools. Each one commanding a 1/5 of a mile area radius, and all of a sudden, there's not a whole lotta room for independent quickie marts. We don't have any anymore.
Gotta make those kids walk at least 1/4 mile for a beer and some smokes.
Alcohol and tobacco are exactly like child rapists.
Jesus Christ. It's really amazing that you NAMBLA faggot kiddie fucker apologist pieces of shit actually think this is a good hill to die on. The good news is that you probably WILL die on it. You have the entire government and top 1% in your corner, but people really don't care for you perverted scumfucks raping their kids and justice will prevail.
Maybe they enacted the ordinance specifically to eliminate quickie marts. They tend to attract less-than-desirable clientele.
"If something were to happen, then it falls on me."
That's the first rule of being a bureaucrat: NEVER take responsibility for making a decision.
Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 800$+ daily… You can earn from16000$-32000$ a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish…lli It’s a flexible job but a good eaning opportunity
This Website OPEN HERE…………..>>> onlinecareer1
Won't someone think of the poor kiddie fuckers?
It's no wonder you faggot pieces of shit didn't report shreek's child porn to the police, as you should have. I'm actually surprised you even bothered deleting it.
It's too bad nobody raped Lenore Skenazy to death before she could breed and inflict this sick shit on her children. If they survive past adolescence their memoirs will be a hard read some day. "And then there was the time when my mommy let a convicted kiddie fucker babysit me without supervision to prove what a good virtue-signaling cunt she was."
When, precisely, has Skenazy advocated for convicted child molesters to be allowed to supervise children?
She's arguing here for a dying men pushing 80 to be allowed end-of-life care at his daughter's home. The fact that she refuses to state what he was convicted of is certainly open to criticism, but she seems to believe that this particular sex offender is no longer physically CAPABLE of being a threat to children. That's a far cry from saying "give him access to children".
She's being disingenuous for refusing to state what he was convicted of, or providing enough information for the readers to look it up for themselves, but that doesn't make you sound any less unhinged.
No, she isn't being disingenuous or deceptive. She doesn't know, but even if she did, she would not have printed his name. The original news story by a local reporter does not give the information either.https://www.yourconroenews.com/neighborhood/moco/news/article/Shenandoah-won-t-make-exception-to-sex-offender-or-17610363.php
So you are railing on people on the registry while at the same time advocating someone should be eaped because you dislike her?
Typical victim advocacy doublespeak. This is why self-professed victim advocates are the worst people on the planet.
I am a very old Karma person. All I can do is hope Chief of Police Troye Dunlap gets his due.
@Chang Moers, get some help dude. It is not good to carry that much hate in your heart.
Something tells me the karmic penalty for preventing a child rapist from raping children is pretty light you piece of shit pedophile. Get help for your disgusting sexual deviancy you piece of shit. The only person's heart you should be worried about is yours when some pissed off parent of the 7 year old kid you just fucked decides to blow yours out with a .45 ACP.
So, in your opinion, this 79 year old man on his deathbed would be raping children, and the one and only thing stopping him is not being allowed to live 800ft from a specific toddler park in Shenandoah, TX?
Notice they don't tell you the person's name so you can look up what they did.
Some heinous crimes have life long consequences. I have no problem with that.
Heinous crimes like urinating in public?
I'd be a LOT more willing to give Reason the benefit of the doubt if they didn't have a history or making emotional arguments about sex offenders on the registry while refusing to state what they did to get ON the registry.
The fact that ZERO space in this article is devoted to his crime, and his name wasn't provided to allow us to do the legwork ourselves, leads me to suspect that it's pretty heinous. I'd be willing to bet a few hundred dollars that, if his crime was urinating on a dumpster while drunk in his early 20's, or having sex with a seventeen-year-old girl when he was eighteen, that this article would have mentioned it.
I have to agree in general that they have a severe problem of underplaying crimes of people for political purposes.
However, I can understand the argument that a man in hospice is unable to be a threat to anyone and that the ban is serving no purpose.
Additionally, the distance rule is absurd since people not only have cars, but they have legs. A quarter-mile distance has no meaningful difference from a hundred. It's arbitrary and serves no purpose.
Can you define what’s heinous? Is having sexual thoughts about children heinous? Is viewing child porn heinous? Most people recoil at these, but it’s important to note that these sins create no victims.
Viewing child porn may not create any victims, but making child porn does, and the latter is a prerequisite for the former.
Also, I don't believe merely having sexual thoughts about children is criminalized anywhere in the US, so, heinous or not, its not a crime that can be punished.
That said, I do agree on the principle. Defining what crimes can be punished for life is anything but clear and objective.
I hereby propose the "Reason.com Law Of Sex Offenders":
In any Reason article demanding that the reader feel sorry for a convicted Sex Offender, the amount of information provided ABOUT the crime that the Offender was convicted of is inversely proportional to the heinousness of the crime.
That isn't applicable to ONLY Reason, it's more an iron law of crime and favored groups, of which pedophiles are one to the coastal elites in journalism.
You are so misusing the word "pedophile." It is not a synonym for child molester. It is a medical term, not a legal one. Many with pedophilia have not molested a child or committed a sexual offense. And conversely, many who have sexually abused a child are not pedophiles. And why would anyone need to look him up? I have no idea who he is, where he is, or what he did in the past, and neither does Lenore. None of that is the point. The point is that he is dying and needs to be where he can be taken care of, and he has family who want to do that. If he was ever at risk of being a danger to children -- a big IF -- he no longer is. And anything that punishes beyond the scope of the sentence of his crime is illegal, but that is what is happening. And, if more is needed, state law requires small towns like Shenandoah who choose to implement sex offender residence restrictions to have an exemption process built into its ordinance, and Shenandoah doesn't, or at least they say they don't.
Sex offenders commit the most disgusting crimes taking advantage of children for their personal pleasure. Later they act shocked that general public doesn't want them around.
When I read articles like this, I am reminded of liberal rags like The New Yorker. They always have some sympathy piece (usually about illegals, or indigenous people) where they paint them in the softest light, the entire point of which is to make you FEEL SAD they are getting it good and hard from the government. It’s agitprop.
Reason should avoid cheap sentimentality. I’m not fooled. In fact I resent it when a writer tries to play me like this. Why should this guy get special treatment because he’s dying? What was his crime? Is he still serving time for the sex abuse, or is he locked up for another reason? There’s not enough information here to say one way or another. If you want to convince people the sex offender registry is inhumane and extrajudicial (it is) then explain why. If you want to run an article on this guy, do some homework.
Please understand that the journalist, Lenore Skenazy, did not have any information on the person. His age, that he is on a sex offender registry, that he is bed-ridden and dying, and that his family requested an exemption in their residence restrictions ordinance and were denied are ALL of the information that any journalist writing about this incident have been able to get. He may not even live in Texas. All of his information has been withheld.
These inane articles (there are exceptions) about the perceived injustices done to criminals by the state are the one thing I don't like about this publication.
This guy would be castrated and imprisoned permanently if I had my way.
I know you are the ignorant one, but you would castrate a man whose crimes are unknown to you?
If convicted for serious sexual offenses, yep.
People like you should be lobotomized and their fingers removed, but we all can't have what we want.
While there might be too many actions land people on the registry, there are far too many predators that are out of prison. One thing I've got to say for most conservatives, they aren't weak on crime. I'm anti-death penalty, but I would compromise on that stance in a second for sexual predators. By the way, the story is missing many important details. It does not get a passing grade. F.
This Chang Moers clown is a mentally ill clown who stalks anyone online who opposes the registry and makes death threats against them. He is poster child for the reason to abolish the registry. It is only a matter of time before we discover this loser's compound out in North Georgia, a dilapidated dump where sixteen rusty cars sit in the yard but not one work, a mountain of cheap beer bottles littering the yard, and our troll engaging in coitus with his toothless cousin.
I'm sure you'll be at the front of the raging mob, and when you do, you'll go to prison. Then you'll find out what rape is really all about.