Sex Offender Brunch!

A man went to prison when he was 12 for touching his sister's vagina. Now he's fighting to change the laws that destroyed his life.

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

Sex Offender Brunch!

HD Video Download

When Josh Gravens was 12, he was locked up for three and a half years for touching his sister's vagina. Upon his release, Gravens was added to the Texas Sex Offender Registry, a publicly searchable database that identifies him as the perpetrator of a sex crime and tracks where he lives. He was ostracized in high school, nearly chased out of college, and as an adult, has found it difficult to find work or lead a normal life.

When he was 19, Galen Baughman was sentenced to six and a half years for having a consensual relationship with a 14-year-old. When his release date came up, the state of Virginia refused to let him go on the grounds that he was a danger to society. So he served an additional three years; under Virginia's civil commitment laws, he might have spent the rest of his life locked up.

Gravens and Baughman were the featured guests at a brunch held on March 22, 2015 at the home of Reason.com Contributor Lenore Skenazy that was aimed at bringing attention to how our criminal justice system tramples on the rights of people charged with sex crimes.

Skenazy decided to host the brunch "not because I'm pro sex offender," she says, "but because there are so many people with this label who pose no threat to children whatsoever, and I wanted the public to start realizing that."

Listen to an mp3 of the entire one-hour-and-25-minute event:

Read Skenazy's article about the event in the New York Daily News.

Read an interview on the topic with Skenazy in Salon.

Learn more about Josh Gravens, who could go back to prison for allegedly failing to register his most recent address with state authorities.

Produced, shot, and edited by Jim Epstein.

6 minutes and 11 seconds.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube Channel to get notified when new material goes live.

This post was updated to correct Galen Baughman's name. He was originally identified as Matthew.

Comments

[Ken Shultz]

And yet Lena Dunham walks around as free as a bird.

[Idle Hands]

He kind of looks like Lena Dunham.

[Pl?ya Manhattan.]

I've never seen them in the same room together.

[faeriemama]

Just sayin.

[HazelMeade]

To be fair, I don't think what Lena Dunham did should be actionable. Kids do all sorts of wierd things that are generally completely innocent.

[Ken Shultz]

I don't know the details of what Lena Dunham did, but it doesn't seem to be fundamentally different from what this 12 year old kid did--and the inequity is clear.

Everybody who doesn't think Lena Dunham should be in the sex offender registry for what she did should be on this guy's side.

The punishment doesn't fit. I'm not even clear on it being a crime. And even if it were, making this guy's life so difficult for the rest of his life is cruel if not unusual.

[rac3rx]

As I understand (and major disclaimer here because I'm not reading her stupid book), Dunham bribed the sister with candy to allow her to kiss her for prolonged periods of time, fingered the little girl on more than one occasion, and masturbated in bed next to her.

This seems to go somewhat beyond a kid's curiosity.

[MarkLastname]

Don't worry, the feminists who so ardently oppose gender double standards will be rushing to this guy's in no time... Any time now, I'm positive.

[Hyperion]

Do you know who didn't get locked up for touching their sister's vagina?

[Sudden]

Jamie Lannister?

[Xeones]

Bill Cosby?

[Crusty Juggler]

Chris Dollanganger?

[Robert]

Millions of other boys & girls?

[MarkLastname]

You?

[sarcasmic]

Aw, come on. The guy obviously looks like a perv.

[You're Kidding]

Yep. And that's why we made him register. If he looked like say, a young Robert Redford, we'd have let him off with a warning. And, all sorts of girls, and probably a few guys, would be clamoring for his address.

"Sex offender" is just another shorthand we use societally to label people broadly so as to have an easy way of dispensing with them. God forbid we should treat them as individuals and think for one moment. Oh no, we don't have time for that.

[tiapa]

Usually people who make comments like that have something to hide, something to distance themselves from. Of maybe you are a politician looking for votes? Seriously what are the characteristics of a perv? Gentle speech? Slight lisp? Lack of a six-pack?

[Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns]

There are states where you can be put on the sex offender registry for streaking if you're seen by a child and in some states you can go on for public urination.

Some more examples.

"Another case in the report: "In 2004, in Western Pennsylvania, a 15-year-old girl was charged with manufacturing and disseminating child pornography for having taken nude photos of herself and (posting) them on the internet. She was charged as an adult, and as of 2012 was facing registration for life.""

Clearly she is a serious danger to society.

[Hyperion]

I remember back in the 70s when these were things we laughed about.

We've since moved straight forward into the new Puritan age. Let's just get it the fuck over with and start burning witches again.

[Robert]

What more evidence did we need than the links in Jesse Walker's bit about sex ed films, which said some of these that were used instructionally for children in the 1970s can't even be shown publicly to adults now? (There's probably never been a court case, so we'll never really know, but the point is they're afraid to take the chance.)

[Veillantif]

Charged, as an adult, with manufacturing nude images of a child, herself. How do DA's keep a straight face when they announce charges like this?

[faeriemama]

I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking this. How can she be charged as an adult for distributing child pornography of herself? If she's charged as an adult, then that means those were pictures of an adult. WTF.

[Enough About Palin]

I wouldn't hire the guy.

[Hyperion]

I'd bet he was also consorting with the devil. I say burn the witch.

[Beautiful Bean Footage]

Does he weigh as much as a duck?

[Hyperion]

Well, if we would just hurry up and progress onto the new age of enlightenment, we'd just throw that fucker in the pond and see if he sinks.

[Catatafish]

And who are you, BBF, that is so wise in the ways of science?

[HazelMeade]

Suggestion: Have periodic reviews of people on the registry by an independent judge, including a psych eval. Remove anyone is that considered no longer a danger.

Also, stop using sex offender registration as punishment. It should only be there for public safety, and if someone isn't a danger to the public they shouldn't be on it.

[sarcasmic]

Better yet, just get rid of the registry. If someone is a danger to the public, then they should be locked up. Otherwise leave them alone.

[Hyperion]

I'm agreeing with sarcasmic on this one.

[Libertymike]

As you should.

[Hyperion]

Any sane and reasonable person would. Unfortunately, we live in a society packed with people who are neither of those things.

[MarkLastname]

Any politician who proposes reasonable reform of the sex offender registry is politically dead. His opponent will crucify him as a molester lover, and the public (especially parents) are ever eager to participate in the two minute hate because it makes them feel better about their own failures as parents and human beings.

Much like with child support reform, there are self-evidently sensible things that should be done, but never will be, because the sound bite propaganda against the reformer would be too irreparably damning in the eyes of the retarded public.

[Robert]

& they should be physically restrained only to the degree & for the duration necessary for them to cool off, not for months or years. If they're judged incorrigibly dangerous, they should be killed.

[Andrew S.]

Counterpoint: Either judges are elected, or judges are appointed by someone who is elected. Elected officials always run on being "tough on crime". Elected officials would not want to face questioning suggesting that "they go easy on sex offenders" because some sex offenders might come off the list under such a review. So either it wouldn't happen or nobody would ever be taken off the list.

[MarkLastname]

Well what would happen is that, at some point, if even just one person taken off the list commits a sex crime, one out of a million, a statistical inevitability, it would be used as ammunition against the pol who introduced the reform, and would probably work, and said pol's replacement would then repeal it.

People will tolerate a few dozen or hundred innocent men being executed, acceptable collateral damage, but for some curious reason, when it comes to sex crimes, one is just too many and no measure is too extreme to prevent it, rights be damned.

[jaxpsych]

One rape /murder/serious sex crime etc is one to many if its your wife,son,daughter,even friend etc.
When its just an intellectual exercise like here no big deal but reality is very different.
Have come across several murders of convicts shortly after occurrences(I was fortunate-scene cleaned up before got there) and two officers I knew were murdered 2 years after I retired from DOC.It is very different when real and not just intellectual discussion.
Rights should be taken into account especially victims and possible future victims.

[Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns]

Also, eliminate the sex offender registry because punishing someone for life for a crime not worthy of life in prison is cruel and unusual punishment. If someone is a danger to society, keep them locked up. If someone is allowed out of prison, let them get on with their lives.

There is no point in letting people out of jail if you believe that they're such a clear and present danger to society that they need to be put on a public registry for life. Either keep them in jail if the crime warrants it or let them pay their debt to society and move on.

[Catatafish]

The problem is that this issue is one of propensity to commit future crimes. You can't punish someone for that. Punishment is supposed to be meted out for the crime committed. I don't know where the psych literature currently stands on recidivism (if anyone has any links I'd be interested to read the most current literature) but the fact remains that punishing someone - whether locking them up or putting them on a list - for things you think they might do is a pretty clear violation of the Constitution.

[Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns]

You're already punishing them for something they 'might' do. That's why the registry exists, correct? Because they might re-offend?

That's the point. If someone commits a crime so heinous that they simply cannot safely be allowed into society, lock them up and throw away the key. For any other crime, they should serve their sentence and be allowed to move on.

[Libertymike]

Touching the vagina of one's sister can not possibly be construed as the commission of "a crime so heinous that [one] simply cannot safely be allowed into society."

[Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns]

Yes Mike, that's the point - this crime would not qualify which is why he shouldn't be on any sort of registry.

We agree.

[Hyperion]

The true question is was he consorting with the devil before or after the sinful touching. Clearly, we cannot move on to the new Puritan age of enlightenment until we can ask the really important questions.

[Viscount Irish, Slayer of Huns]

It seems to me that what the sex offender registry really is is a backdoor means to punish people the public doesn't like for life for crimes that aren't deserving of lifetime punishment.

Sex offenders are icky and scary. Of course, most of them are in trouble for incredibly minor crimes, like grabbing a tit in a bar or touching their sister's vagina at 11 years old or streaking or public urination, but if you lump them all as 'sex offenders' people will mindlessly support their excommunication from civil society.

So they get lifetime punishments for a crime that might have netted them a month in jail. It's basically a human rights violation, but no one gives a shit because ZOMG sex offenders, so lifelong punishments for misdemeanors become socially acceptable.

[You're Kidding]

Well, I'm with you there but....urinating in public, isn't a sex crime and won't be charged as one. It is a crime all unto it's own.

Once we start seeing bodily excrement as sexual activity, well we've moved onto an entirely new topic.

[Catatafish]

I'm agreeing with you on the registry. My point is that crimes are theoretically supposed to be assigned a term of years for punishment for that one, individual crime. While rehabilitation and "danger to society" might be appropriate considerations when it comes to early release/parole, I don't see how it is even remotely constitutional to increase punishment simply because society thinks the guy "might" commit another crime, no matter how horrid. Punishment is supposed to be "just deserts," not some prophylactic measure to keep people away from society for things they haven't done yet.

[Francisco d'Anconia]

I'd be fine with the punishment doubling or tripling with each additional offense.

But, yes, no one should be basing punishments upon the probability of future occurrences.

[jaxpsych]

You clearly have no concept of what you are talking about as 99% of people don't.
Before I worked in max security prisons and forensic unit and was trained and experienced treating molesters,child and adult rapists/murderers...(many of them multiple offenders) who were let out and reoffended over and over-I thought in a similar manner.
When still working with them I ALWAYS considered the perps history,researched it very well,got to know them and above all took into account possible future victims.
Any mistake made by letting a perv out can lead to such horrendous things I will not even describe it here.
The world needs to be protected from many of them....there is such a thing as born evil....I have seen it.
Most people are literally unable to believe what some of these perps do.
Thats how they frequently get away with their crimes.

What people generally read in news etc covers very little of the horror and suffering of the victims which many perps purposely inflict for their own enjoyment.

Please re examine your view points with the victims/ future victims in mind.
None of what I posted here is exaggerated in any way.

[Robert]

Punishing people at all doesn't violate the US Const., but it's a practice I think shouldn't be unquestioningly accepted. Spanking a baby may be OK, fines for violations of club rules, distance penalties in football, sure; but trying to make adults' lives better by making it worse for some of them??!

[Hyperion]

What we are effectively doing in the USA right now is creating a large group of individuals who have no hope of ever getting a decent job, becoming an accepted and productive member of society, or even living a normal life, ever again. Combine this with the people convicted on felony drug charges. Maybe the latter are not on some registry, but they still will likely never get a decent job, and many cannot even vote or own a gun. These people are half citizens, stripped of their dignity and constitutional rights, forever. Basically we have a large group of disenfranchised individuals. I have to ask, what good can come of this?

We have went very wrong as a country, headed down a very slippery slope.

[sarcasmic]

Basically we have a large group of disenfranchised individuals. I have to ask, what good can come of this?

It entrenches those who are in power, and they like it that way. Especially the part about not allowing drug felons to vote. If they could, then they might vote for libertarians, and we can't have that.

[Hyperion]

Especially since voting for libertarians might lead to sentencing reform and all sorts of bad things like that.

[The Immaculate Trouser]

I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with this.

We don't have a good grasp on what comprises a person's sexuality and how they act on such. Indeed, the cultural view seems to be leaning towards believing that a person's sexuality is immutable and must be acted on else there will be mental consequences. If this is truly the case, then it is reasonable to suppose that the sex offender (of illicit sex acts of public concern, like rape or kiddie-touching) is not reformed and has a high chance of recidivism. This being the case, it is not a necessary aspect of justice to foist an ultimately unreformed criminal on society -- any punishment lesser than life imprisonment is merely an attempt to balance the cost of life imprisonment with the need to regulate the criminal's behavior.

Libertarians present a false dichotomy when they claim that justice necessitates this simple prison/not prison dichotomy.

[Tonio]

I think you're conflating sexual orientation with overall sexual behavior. Such conflation is not helpful.

[Robert]

Suppose it could be proven that person X is going to commit the same type of crime n times. Surely there'd be more efficient means of restraint of X than incarcer'n.

[Limpee Wiltstock]

Not possible, since such is determined by the free choices of the subject, and so do not comprise part of the chain of deterministic events. Certainly one may make a prediction of likelihood, but the subject can always queer the whole model simply by chusing to act otherwise than predicted.

Certainly it's conceivable to recognise certain crimes as so motherfucking heinous that the chain of decisions necessary to carry them out even once necessitate such a diversion from acceptable behavior that in nearly every case anybody caught doing it even once can never be trusted not to be a total sociopath next chance he gets--at which point he'll certainly be better at getting away with it. Such a conceit would entirely justify applying a very, very heavy punishment. That would be the way to go, rather than this silliness with a relatively light formal punishment coupled to an insanely onerous pseudopunishment. The problem there, however, is that if these morons can't be trusted to apply the children's version without fucking it up, they certainly can't be trusted to mete out any real heavy punishments like floggings or killing. There's something to be said for the old system where punishments took the form of restitutions or, for very bad crimes, outlawry. I'd rather trust the victim's family to get it right than I would some bozo with a magical judge hat.

[jaxpsych]

Its not punishment...its an an attempt to protect others from being future victims.
Very high re offending rate among SOs.

[Terc]

Whenever I hear/read about someone molesting a little child, my gut instinct is to demand that they be ground up by an industrial shredder and spread around a field as food for crows. But then I see a story like this and it becomes perfectly obvious that human beings are incapable of administering justice. If we can't figure out how to distinguish between the people who need to be destroyed and the people who deserve leniency, we should not have the power to destroy anyone.

[Free Society]

But then I see a story like this and it becomes perfectly obvious that human beings are incapable of administering justice.

Justice is an invention of human beings, but not an invention of states. What is clear is that institutions filled to the brim with politicians that received their authority from a deeply flawed popularity contest, are not capable of administering justice.

[Rhywun]

we can't figure out how to distinguish between the people who need to be destroyed and the people who deserve leniency

Sure we can. We are just too lazy to do so.

[Tonio]

I'm always suspicious of anyone who states that another person or group "needs" this. It's intellectual dishonesty straight up, and cowardly at that. Terc feels a group of people should be destroyed but lacks the intellectual integrity to even take credit for that, thus the passive-aggressive tone in "the people who need to be destroyed."

Grow a pair, Terc, and at least own up to your feelings. Don't project those feelings onto others.

[Limpee Wiltstock]

Okay. Let me put it this way: They're begging for it.

[Robert]

If we can't figure out how to distinguish between the people who need to be destroyed and the people who deserve leniency, we should not have the power to destroy anyone.

Then you're for outlawing lethal weapons?

[Limpee Wiltstock]

I think human beings are entirely capable of administering justice. It's "The People" who can't be trusted.

[jaxpsych]

So if we cant do it perfectly we freeze up and don't even try????
Medicine is so totally primitive, law is incredibly flawed, psychiatry is weak, psychotherapy isn't even out of the voodoo stage but they are all we have.
What else should we do sit around like beat down dogs shiver and die sadly and passively?

I prefer to kick and fight even on the way out.

[jaxpsych]

PS above post by jaxpsych is for terc...................

[kinnath]

Anyone that wears a sweater vest is clearly a dangerous pervert.

[Dweebston]

Behold the soothing power of the enchanted sweatervest. BEHOLD IT!

[Hyperion]

I have this feeling that the sweater vest will not appear for the next round.

[n8]

...Josh Gravens, Who Went To Prison When He Was 12 for Touching His Sister's Vagina [VIDEO]

Video, you say? Phrasing?

[straffinrun]

and obviously I WASN'T the only one. Just the only one who doesn't refresh enough.

[Robert]

What is it w the headline writers here? It seems the deadlines of the 'net age combine w the habits of scarce space on paper to produce these gaffes. Well, that plus some incompetence. Can't beat the price, though.

[Hyperion]

Wait a minute... is Salon actually on the right side of something for once? It has to be an accident, this author won't be there tomorrow, after the high council of new puritans meet.

[Tonio]

Only because they would then have to turn on Dunham, as well.

[straffinrun]

Sex Offender Brunch! Meet Josh Gravens, Who Went To Prison When He Was 12 for Touching His Sister's Vagina [VIDEO]

C'mon, I wasn't the only one to take a second look at the title and say "Video?". Reminds of yahoo news a few years back. They had the story "Gingrich,Santorum and Romney in three way...." and then you click on it and it says "tie".

[straffinrun]

I have a niece that is constantly putting pics on FB of people arrested for sex crimes in the area. I've pointed out to her that they haven't been convicted and she may be causing an innocent person harm. I get no reply on that from her and the posts still keep coming.

[Hyperion]

The first thing you need to do is stop seeing FB. It's a den of utter stupidity.

[straffinrun]

Family halfway around the world. Suppose a pen and paper would be better.

[AlexInCT]

Did email or Skype stop working?

[jaxpsych]

She has some kind of unmet need...maybe to punish some one? something happen to her in past?

[Sevo]

Among the doctors, judges, lawyers, assorted LEOs involved in this case, would a single one swear under oath to have never 'played doctor' when s/he was a kid?
If so, I think we've immediately found a perjurer.

[Hyperion]

It was different when they did it.

[Marshall Gill]

It isn't just doctors, judges, lawyers and assorted LEO's involved in "sex offender registry" but also a host of other "industries". Counselors, people who administer polygraphs, drug tests and, yes, even some kind of test where they put a sensor on your dick and then show you pictures to judge your arousal of them. (I swear I have friend in Texas who has had to undergo this). Let's also not forget the GPS bracelet monitoring companies.

It is a truly fucked up system with all kinds of bad incentives.

[Rhywun]

they put a sensor on your dick and then show you pictures to judge your arousal of them

W
T
F

[jaxpsych]

Definition of PLETHYSMOGRAPH

: an instrument for determining and registering variations in the size of an organ, limb, or part resulting from changes in the amount of blood present or passing through it

Its a well known bio feed back machine that has been in use since the 70s or so.
Put pressure sensitive band around penis and show various pictures etc to help determine what arouses you....men, women, little girls, little boys, sado-masochistic stuff etc.
Supposedly fairly effective.
Generally not the only thing used and think gen in legal cases.
Used in serious cases and to help assess truthfulness of accused or convicted sex offenders/ help determine if aroused by little girls/boys ie pedophile.Think its used to asses effectiveness of treatment of pedophiles too.

[Dark Lord of the Cis]

8 year olds dude.

[MJGreen]

What's a pederast?

[straffinrun]

Shut up, Donnie.

[adolphowisner]

My roomate's mom makes $74 /hr on the computer . She has been out of work for 6 months but last month her income was $20654 just working on the computer for a few hours.
look at here now????????????? http://www.jobsfish.com

[AlexInCT]

I wonder if your roomate's mom should be on the sex offender list?

[jaxpsych]

...................No......more likely good looking skilled hooker list.............

[faeriemama]

She's on the MILF list.

[Robert]

Galen Baughman looks like Chris Christie. The face, I mean.

What's really incongruous is when you're allowed to have your own children, but not to be around others'!

[mfckr]

Sex Offender Shuffle

[RRiver]

This is way to heavy a subject for far to many people because they can't do any heavy lifting. For those of us who can, and have seen the illogical approach that society has taken over the past several decades on child abuse, and child sexual abuse and exploitation, its hard for us to understand how they could get it all so wrong, and for them to believe they are doing it so right.

Of course, what must be made plain early on is that money has a lot to do with whether you are a molester or a politician. Next it must be understood that it is no longer acceptable for children to explore their sexuality, and play 'doctor', how ever playing 'lawyer' and 'judge' is still acceptable.

There is only one way to fully insure that there is no bad things going to happen to a child, and that is to enclose them in a solid brick box, put some wheels on it, and wheel them wherever they need to go. Leave an opening for necessities, and do a new box fitting each year, by adding extra bricks as needed. Then when they turn 18, no wait, 25, chip the bricks away, and let them be on their way. Oh, I know its ridiculous, but isn't just about everything these days? Common sense and logic be damned.

[jaxpsych]

Worked in several max security state prisons and was therapist and evaluator for variety of sex offenders for a number of years.
I have met/worked with hundreds of SOs as pts ,got to know them, read their charts, read their legal records etc and these summaries are grossly leaving out some kind of incredibly important details.
Let me repeat that----The summaries of these stories is leaving some types of serious details out BIGTIME.
I smell several big rats here.Hope Im wrong but in a case where someone could be seriously harmed or even murdered by a person already convicted I prefer to make an error on the side of saving possible future victims.

[faeriemama]

Why the fuck does a 19 year old guy want a 14 year old girl anyway? Ew. But seriously, 14 year old girls know what they're doing and know how to say fuck off if they're not interested.