Walt Disney World bans sex offenders from theme parks

[arthropodtodd]

Ditto to all of this.

I have a friend who is on the registry. His crime? He hooked up with a chick in a club. We were regulars back then and we knew they carded so he didn't even think twice about starting a (immature, mostly sexual) relationship with a young woman he met there. Turns out she was 15 and using her older sister's ID to get in. None of us ever would have guessed - this girl passed a police check when we got pulled over and the officer wanted all our IDs to check for curfew violations - but when her parents found out they were FURIOUS... not at their precious little snowflake, but at the "sexual predator" who "led her astray". And they made sure the prosecutor threw the book at him because in our state reasonable belief of a person's age is not an acceptable defense. Seeing what he went through certainly changed the way I view the registry... It would be a far more effective tool if it was limited to predatory offenses, or even if it gave details of the case beyond "criminal sexual conduct in the 2nd degree".

I think this is purely a PR move on Disney's part, not any sort of protection for park guests. The predator who hasn't yet been convicted is still in the parks, along with any foreign predators who aren't on registries in the US, and of course there are all the other classes of creep that aren't subject to registration - non-sexual abusers, thieves, thugs, etc.

Yes your friend's case is a good example of registries needing more work and making sure if reflects one risk's. Not knowing your friend's case, but having clients with similar details, we would focus less on sexual re-offense and ask the questions about impulsivity, and sexual preoccupation. Why would someone hook up with someone they barely know. Why be involved with someone sexually your barely know. I had a client who dated a girl for 3 months before he found out her real age. When he found out he broke it off, she got angry and called the police.

 

[dadddio]

But again, their rights ended where the safety of my family and others begin!

You keep posting this, but it still doesn't make sense to me.

Prior to Disney kicking out those 75 people, was your family less safe? Mine certainly wasn't.

Also, what rights have been infringed?

 

[dadddio]

In which case they need to prove to the powers that be they are no longer a threat.....names can be removed at least in CT.......AKK

I don't believe that anyone could ever do the bolded bit. Can you prove that you aren't a threat? You might be able to prove that you didn't do something in the past, but you will never be able to prove that you won't do it in the future.

 

[arthropodtodd]

That is not totally correct. The list crimes and offenses change and some have been removed.

Not to mention that no one is saying what standard Disney is using in reviewing each case.

But again, their rights ended where the safety of my family and others begin!

If they didn't want to lose their rights they should not have done the crime and/or gotten help!


Robin you can keep trying to defend these people but you have no ground to stand on!




AKK

Sadly, asking for help in this country can get you investigated before any offense has occurred. I think it is in Germany where there is an organization trying to provide counseling before guys act out. Of course if they cross that line they are reported. Our system does not support that well. As a counselor, if someone told me about their deviant thoughts, I would not want to try to treat them for fear of lawsuits.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Sadly, asking for help in this country can get you investigated before any offense has occurred. I think it is in Germany where there is an organization trying to provide counseling before guys act out. Of course if they cross that line they are reported. Our system does not support that well. As a counselor, if someone told me about their deviant thoughts, I would not want to try to treat them for fear of lawsuits.

I consider it very sad for someone who has not done anything wrong and is asking for help and can't cannot it!

AKK

 

[arthropodtodd]

I'm sorry but it reeks of vigilante justice!! Yes, my family's safety is always going to be first and foremost in my mind. And I take care of that, for my own family.
Disagree all you want. But, I spend more time in WDW than the vast majority of people out there. And the things I see there would curl your hair. Parents sitting at pools, drinking heavily..they can barely stand. but, their kids are in the pool. No way are they watching those kids and even if they saw an issue (and were able to recognize it is an issue) there is no way they could help that child. They are counting on lifeguards to do that for them.
Or the parents that seem to think it's a good idea to allow their very young children to wander around the park or the resort by themselves..even if it is with an older sibling. I have overheard them saying...'Oh, it's WDW. They're safe here. It's not as if we were at home in 'whatever city' !'...oh, but it's exactly the same!!

People let their guard down in WDW...look at the stuff left in strollers...Oh, no one is going to steal it, we're in WDW. But, in all reality? You are actually less safe in WDW in regards to certain crime.

So, I don't buy the whole Disney could keep a data base with offenders on it and then cross check with those registering for resort stays. Only the main person on the reservation shows ID. And again, the vast majority of offenders are still not in 'the system'...they haven't been caught yet. Nothing you can do about that.
But, everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

The number 1 thing I tell parents who want to know how to protect their child is to be involved. Know their friends and meet their friends. Meet their friends' parents. Ditch the TV, cellphone, and computers in their rooms, keep it in the kitchen or public areas of the house. Vacation does mean you get to slack off with your kids, it means you get to be more invested in their lives than before. There is no such thing as safe anymore. Avoid places that do not have policies to protect children. I just checked out a preschool for my kiddo. They lock the doors, you have to buzz to get in. Don't attend a church that has not finger printed and background checked every volunteer.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

You keep posting this, but it still doesn't make sense to me.

Prior to Disney kicking out those 75 people, was your family less safe? Mine certainly wasn't.

Also, what rights have been infringed?

Simple..........if someone is dangerous, their right to go into a Disney park doesn't take presidence over my families right to be safe in the park! Keeping suck a person out of the park makes the park safer.

AKK

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

I don't believe that anyone could ever do the bolded bit. Can you prove that you aren't a threat? You might be able to prove that you didn't do something in the past, but you will never be able to prove that you won't do it in the future.

No my problem how the predator proves it...........since he did the crime, he has to prove he is no longer a threat.


These type of heinous crimes effects people their whole lives! Therefore the extra protection is needed.........its not like keeping the purse snatcher out of the MK.......

AKK

 

[arthropodtodd]

I consider it very sad for someone who has not done anything wrong and is asking for help and can't cannot it!

AKK

As do I, but that is the culture we live in. Therapists and doctors are always afraid of lawsuits. I carry a good size malpractice insurance.

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

The number 1 thing I tell parents who want to know how to protect their child is to be involved. Know their friends and meet their friends. Meet their friends' parents. Ditch the TV, cellphone, and computers in their rooms, keep it in the kitchen or public areas of the house. Vacation does mean you get to slack off with your kids, it means you get to be more invested in their lives than before. There is no such thing as safe anymore. Avoid places that do not have policies to protect children. I just checked out a preschool for my kiddo. They lock the doors, you have to buzz to get in. Don't attend a church that has not finger printed and background checked every volunteer.

I agree 100%


We did the red and the kids complained left and right, we also checked emails (no texting back then).

This idea kids have privacy is fine as long as we felt things were safe.


AKK

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

As do I, but that is the culture we live in. Therapists and doctors are always afraid of lawsuits. I carry a good size malpractice insurance.

Thank you the lawyers of America!


My friend you must have a amazingly hard and stressful job, I have great respect for the things you have said and do.

I believe the debate here is more concerning getting the state sites updated and changed to properly reflect real threat!

AKK

 

[arthropodtodd]

I don't believe that anyone could ever do the bolded bit. Can you prove that you aren't a threat? You might be able to prove that you didn't do something in the past, but you will never be able to prove that you won't do it in the future.

This is very good point. everyone is at risk to offend and be a threat. As you get to know the offender, you find out that many are just like you (except for actual diagnosed pedophiles). However their life situations lead to risky thoughts, feelings and behaviors. This can put them into seemingly benign situations, that 99% of the time leads to good outcomes, but in this case due to some distortions lead to offenses. The build up to acting out is like riding a roller coaster. We are all slowly making our way up the hill, but most of us have the tools to be able to get off before it is too late or before know there could ever be problem.

 

[Jezz1226]

If followed the thread, yes I feel sorry for your friend.........The lists are being updated and the things like this one and peeing in bushes and teenagers having sex with 2 years difference, these are being changed.


Since Disney didn't announce this policy themselves, but rather the news did.........how does it become a PR thing?


Lastly, as I said to goof, who I usually agree with, but not this time, the system is not 100%, no system is!

AKK

Sorry for singling you out, this post just contained a lot of things I wanted to address from this thread, so I hope you don't take it personal, just a different opinion on some points.

Re: the lists being updated
-In Florida (which is the state I would imagine has the most visitors to WDW) the current status of things is that sexual relations (this includes not having sex, but touching and the like) with anyone under the age of 16 is enough to be on the sex offender list. This applies regardless of the age difference (there are some situations if both of the participants are underage, but there are also circumstances where two underage consenting (well as much as minors can consent) minors undergo actions can be enough to get one or both of them on the list, it gets complicated but I can link statutes/explain further if someone gets really curious). As far as I know there are no serious moves to change this in the near future. So, while you might be right, I'm not sure its as nationwide extensive or as changing as quickly as you seem to be implying.

Re: Getting off the List
-In Florida, there are select circumstances where one can get off the list. If it was for certain enumerated offenses and has been over 25 years since conviction with no new offenses. You can also petition for removal under certain circumstances, although its my understanding that practically speaking thats more difficult then it sounds to actually accomplish.

Re: PR
IMO Disney does not want a sexual offender to commit an offense in their park nor make contact with a victim for future offense in their park. Now, whether they feel this way because they want to be nice and prevent such things for happening or because they don't want to be on the news for allowing such a thing to happen is debatable, probably some combination of both.

Re: My general opinion of things (because everyone is on the edge of their seat waiting for it )
Keeping people who are likely to prey on children out of the park is a fantastic thing. Assuming they are just preventing anyone who is on the list from entering regardless of why they are they are on the list is not the correct way to do it IMO. Ideally, I would like to see, more asking for identification to get in the park/obtain tickets, and actual looking into the charges/person's background to determine if they are a threat. Of course, that takes a lot more work/time/money and I don't think they are willing to put in that effort. My concern is that they are preventing lots or all of those that are not a threat by doing it as they are doing it and not doing anything to prevent the actual predators (who if they know about it, and if they are a serious predator I would imagine they know these things) to get around it easily enough. At the same time I'm concerned they are giving parents a false sense of security (although in fairness those parents that are on top of things enough to hear this news prob are the same ones that watch their kids regardless). So overall I'm not sure this is actually doing anything positive *shrugs* but I may be wrong.

 

[arthropodtodd]

Thank you the lawyers of America!


My friend you must have a amazingly hard and stressful job, I have great respect for the things you have said and do.

I believe the debate here is more concerning getting the state sites updated and changed to properly reflect real threat!

AKK

I love my job. It is always a different each day and always an adventure. I am currently not doing it full time to be a stay at home daddy.

And yes registries are a mess and as a result do not protect the public. They are safety blanket that people cling to that provide no real protection.

 

[arthropodtodd]

Re: PR
IMO Disney does not want a sexual offender to commit an offense in their park nor make contact with a victim for future offense in their park. Now, whether they feel this way because they want to be nice and prevent such things for happening or because they don't want to be on the news for allowing such a thing to happen is debatable, probably some combination of both.

The real question is what else is Disney doing to protect minors? Blocking 75 people is nothing. Many other offenders, and uncharged predators/pedophiles walk through those gate daily. This is why I look at as a PR move less about keeping kids safe. Tell me more Disney what you are doing.

 

[cm8]

Does anyone know if this "database" that Disney is using to "ban" these people are only used for scanning male subjects only? Are they including females in this scan? Females can be predators too

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Sorry for singling you out, this post just contained a lot of things I wanted to address from this thread, so I hope you don't take it personal, just a different opinion on some points.

Re: the lists being updated
-In Florida (which is the state I would imagine has the most visitors to WDW) the current status of things is that sexual relations (this includes not having sex, but touching and the like) with anyone under the age of 16 is enough to be on the sex offender list. This applies regardless of the age difference (there are some situations if both of the participants are underage, but there are also circumstances where two underage consenting (well as much as minors can consent) minors undergo actions can be enough to get one or both of them on the list, it gets complicated but I can link statutes/explain further if someone gets really curious). As far as I know there are no serious moves to change this in the near future. So, while you might be right, I'm not sure its as nationwide extensive or as changing as quickly as you seem to be implying.

Re: Getting off the List
-In Florida, there are select circumstances where one can get off the list. If it was for certain enumerated offenses and has been over 25 years since conviction with no new offenses. You can also petition for removal under certain circumstances, although its my understanding that practically speaking thats more difficult then it sounds to actually accomplish.

Re: PR
IMO Disney does not want a sexual offender to commit an offense in their park nor make contact with a victim for future offense in their park. Now, whether they feel this way because they want to be nice and prevent such things for happening or because they don't want to be on the news for allowing such a thing to happen is debatable, probably some combination of both.

Re: My general opinion of things (because everyone is on the edge of their seat waiting for it )
Keeping people who are likely to prey on children out of the park is a fantastic thing. Assuming they are just preventing anyone who is on the list from entering regardless of why they are they are on the list is not the correct way to do it IMO. Ideally, I would like to see, more asking for identification to get in the park/obtain tickets, and actual looking into the charges/person's background to determine if they are a threat. Of course, that takes a lot more work/time/money and I don't think they are willing to put in that effort. My concern is that they are preventing lots or all of those that are not a threat by doing it as they are doing it and not doing anything to prevent the actual predators (who if they know about it, and if they are a serious predator I would imagine they know these things) to get around it easily enough. At the same time I'm concerned they are giving parents a false sense of security (although in fairness those parents that are on top of things enough to hear this news prob are the same ones that watch their kids regardless). So overall I'm not sure this is actually doing anything positive *shrugs* but I may be wrong.

Hi there,

No one ever said it would be easy. or 100%.

I don't think the fact Disney has this policy will make any one with common sense any less careful. Lets face it no matter where you are these days you have to be careful.

I have read about the sites in CT, NY and RI.....I am told all the sites are *somewhat* similar.

I do agree as I said before, the state government have to improve the sites......the type of assault, the degree of danger and the likely hood of repeating.

I am just shocked that some here are saying that since it isn't 100%, we should not do anything! If it isn't 100% is RP!

If their kids or family were attacked, would their opinion change?...I good question for thought!~

AKK

PS...everyone opinion adds...whether you agree or not!


AKK

 

[StitchesGr8Fan]

Hi there,

No one ever said it would be easy. or 100%.

I don't think the fact Disney has this policy will make any one with common sense any less careful. Lets face it no matter were you are these days you have to be careful.

I have read about the sites in CT, NY and RI.....I am told all the sites are *somewhat* similar.

I do agree as I said before, the state government have to improve the sites......the type of assault, the degree of danger and the likely hood of repeating.

I am just shocked that some here are saying that since it isn't 100%, we should not do anything! If it isn't 100% is RP!

If their kids or family were attacked, would their opinion change?...I good question for thought!~

AKK

PS...everyone opinion adds...whether you agree or not!

AKK

I agree. I can't believe that people don't want Disney to so this because they won't be 100% perfect right away. If it stops even one pedophile from getting in then it is worth it in my book.

 

[Minnies Boy Toy]

I am just shocked that some here are saying that since it isn't 100%, we should not do anything!

I agree that this rationale doesn't really make sense to me either. But I think a balance needs to be struck between identifying the real threats and going overboard with excluding people. If you take that "better safe than sorry" logic to the extreme, almost everyone can be a "threat" by some criterion. Do we stop with criminals? How about excluding kids with stuffy noses because of the threat of infection? Or people with funny sounding last names? Or foreigners?... Legally speaking Disney could decide to refuse entry to any of those categories of people, but I'm glad they don't have a blanket policy for doing so. Excluding those who are definitively identified as sexual predators seems like a good idea to me - but I see a slippery slope developing during the discussion in this thread that I think needs to be guarded against.

The irony here is that generally speaking I consider myself really tough when it comes to punishment of violent crimes, especially when committed against children. Don't even get me started on what I would advocate as appropriate punishment. My concern is that I would not want the fear of "bad things happening" to cause an overreaction where Disney starts making arbitrary judgments about people it thinks "deserve" to be in their parks.

If their kids or family were attacked, would their opinion change? ...I good question for thought!~

Maybe, although you could also ask if your child or family was put on some "list" because they made a mistake in the distant past and could not prove to Disney's satisfaction that they were no longer a threat -- opinions might change in that circumstance as well....

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

I agree that this rationale doesn't really make sense to me either. But I think a balance needs to be struck between identifying the real threats and going overboard with excluding people. If you take that "better safe than sorry" logic to the extreme, almost everyone can be a "threat" by some criterion. Do we stop with criminals? How about excluding kids with stuffy noses because of the threat of infection? Or people with funny sounding last names? Or foreigners?... Legally speaking Disney could decide to refuse entry to any of those categories of people, but I'm glad they don't have a blanket policy for doing so. Excluding those who are definitively identified as sexual predators seems like a good idea to me - but I see a slippery slope developing during the discussion in this thread that I think needs to be guarded against.

The irony here is that generally speaking I consider myself really tough when it comes to punishment of violent crimes, especially when committed against children. Don't even get me started on what I would advocate as appropriate punishment. My concern is that I would not want the fear of "bad things happening" to cause an overreaction where Disney starts making arbitrary judgments about people it thinks "deserve" to be in their parks.


Ahh........but now your looking at the extremes, however if you read my posts I have repeated said the sites need and are slowly being redone and that the real threat needs to be determined........but for now we have what we have...........and if keeping those 75 predators out to make things safer...........then so be it!



Maybe, although you could also ask if your child or family was put on some "list" because they made a mistake in the distant past and could not prove to Disney's satisfaction that they were no longer a threat -- opinions might change in that circumstance as well....

Good counter point, while I would not be happy about it...............I would understand the reasoning and my fight would be with the laws and in the courts.


I agree a balance is important, the problem is that these crime are so heinous and stick with kids and people their whole lives.......caution must be on the safe of the public. That is why other crimes you do your time and probation and if you make your life right , you move along. We don't let serial killers have the same rights because of the heinous nature of the crime and the threat of repeating
AKK