Co-sponsors and proponents of proposed sex registry-based legislation in North Carolina say that it is merely administrative in nature and needed for budgetary reasons.
Here we go again.
Lester Gerard Packingham simply wanted to express his joy and thanks online back in 2010 for his dismissal of a traffic ticket. Most certainly, he never expected his Facebook post to end up as the focal point of a case to be initially considered by the U.S. Supreme Court next week.
One topic that retains high-profile interest among the general public in many states is restrictions on sex offenders following their convictions and criminal sentencing outcomes.
It is certainly well understood by most people that going online to view or download illegal pornography is a high-risk activity. The potential consequences of that can be flatly draconian for an individual in North Carolina or elsewhere whose computer is seized by criminal authorities.
In North Carolina, as well as in 15 other states, felonies have no statute of limitations, meaning that someone can report a rape that he or she says occurred decades ago. By and large, this lack of restriction is friendly to victims and can be a good thing.
Here's a question that is sure to elicit passionate arguments across a wide spectrum of opinions among people paying close attention to the handling of sex-based complaints on American college campuses: Is guidance issued to campus officials regarding procedures to follow when investigating alleged instances of rape and other criminal sexual conduct fair or decidedly stacked against those who are accused?
Upward mobility for registered sex offenders?
You don't want to be arrested for or convicted on any criminal charge in North Carolina, obviously.
Not guilty does not necessarily mean innocent, nor does it have to strongly point to innocence in a court of law.