2005 Senate Bill 129 (Establish sex offender parole restrictions )

Legislation watch

Public Act 126 of 2005

[Comments on this legislation] [Post new comment] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Sen. Alan Sanborn (R) on February 1, 2005, to prohibit a child sex abuser on probation from living within one mile of a school, or from entering upon school property. Also, to allow courts to require an unlimited period of supervised probation for convicted child sex abusers, and require a minimum five year probation.
- Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 1, 2005.
  - Reported in the Senate on June 29, 2005, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on June 29, 2005, to expand the "school safety zone" measure to apply to individuals on the sexual offenders registry, with exceptions for those convicted of less serious crimes or for certain offences committed as a juvenile; also prohibit covered individuals from working or or loitering in a zone, with a few qualified exceptions for an offender who already has a job within a zone; and slightly narrow the definition of "school property" that provides the basis for the 1,000 foot zone. The substitute passed in the Senate by voice vote on June 29, 2005.
- Amendment offered by Sen. Alan L. Cropsey (R) on June 30, 2005, to specify that a covered individual who works in one of the zones under the "sporadic and intermittent" work exception would still be prohibited from having any contact with minors. The amendment passed in the Senate by voice vote on June 30, 2005.
- Amendment offered by Sen. Burton Leland (D) on June 30, 2005, to increase from 19 to 25 the age of an individual covered under an exception that allows a person on the sexual offender registry who is a minor living with his parents in a home within 1,000 feet of a school to not have to move out. The amendment failed in the Senate by voice vote on June 30, 2005.
Passed in the Senate (33 to 1) on June 30, 2005, to prohibit a person on the sexual offenders registry from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of a school, with certain exceptions for those convicted of less serious non-coercive crimes or for certain offences committed as a juvenile. Also, to allow courts to require an unlimited period of supervised probation for convicted child sex abusers, and require a minimum five year probation. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the House on June 30, 2005.
- Referred to the House Education Committee on June 30, 2005.
  - Reported in the House on August 24, 2005, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-3) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the House on August 31, 2005, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that imposes the bill's "school safety zone" prohibitions only during the time an individual is on probation. The substitute passed in the House by voice vote on August 31, 2005.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Brian Palmer (R) on August 31, 2005, to provide an exception for an individual not more than 26 years old who lives with a parent or in an assisted living facility, if the individual also attends a "special education program". The amendment passed in the House by voice vote on August 31, 2005.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Brian Palmer (R) on August 31, 2005, to not include certain limitations on a judge's authority to exempt an individual from the extended probation requirement. The amendment passed in the House by voice vote on August 31, 2005.
Passed in the House (106 to 1) on August 31, 2005, to prohibit a person on probation for certain child sex crimes from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of a school, with certain exceptions. The bill would allow courts to impose a five year probation for such crimes. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the Senate on September 6, 2005.
Passed in the Senate (35 to 1) on September 13, 2005, to concur with the House-passed version of the bill. [Vote Details and Comments]
Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on September 28, 2005.

Most Recent Comments

Add Comment

1) Re: 2005 Senate Bill 129 (Establish sex offender parole restrictions ) [by viewer on November 18, 2009]

There are so many issues and emotions surrounding this subject. And so much confusion mixed with facts fiction and hype that it is hard to know when and what to say. Too many smug and self righteous attitudes combined with genuine fear loathing and anger to really reach out and touch some otherwise undisclosed truths.

This subject is not new. But the media siezes upon it whenever a ratings boost is needed or another issue needs to be clouded over.The public leaders and judicial system know that they have no effective response or any way to prevent it other than to impose truly draconian sentencing in order to show that they are at least doing something, anything about it. Even if that hasty effort clumsily destroys more lives than it claims to defend. The fact is that sexual abuse and molestation has been around since the beginning of civilisation and will be going on in some form or another till the end of it.

On every street in every neighborhood in every village town and city in America there is at least one household with a dark "Family Secret". If every single person,father,mother,brother,sister aunt,uncle,cousin,teacher, or trusted familyfriend or neighbor who has ever "done something" were to be brought in and have the "Secret" revealed and prosecuted there would be no room in the prisons for murderers, drug dealer, or terrorists!

Because there is such a desire to "keep it quiet" or "just in the family" so no one is embarrassed it causes a deep frustration that is manifested whenever there is such a disclosure of anyone caught outside the family. The suppressed rage is then unleashed in a whirlwind of anger and a blind desire for revenge and to burn the witches at the stake!!

It truly is a Scarlet Letter branded on ones forehead and for some that may be necessary. But to tar and feather with the same brush anyone who has ever had even a minor episode or made a mistake in this area is to truly throw the baby out with the bathwater. And since this message seems to be so full of cliches let me add one more that we should all be asking when it comes to pointing fingers and voicing condemnation......." WHATS IN YOUR WALLET????"""

Line

2) Non-Sex Abuse Crimes [by Anonymous Citizen on July 2, 2008]
Why do they feel that they HAVE to put someone on the Sex Offender Registry for urinating in public,or mooning someone,etc.? I had the CPS agency come to my home once due to a complaint made by my sons school. My co worker sent me a e-card with 5 naked men with their hands covering their genitalia, just waving their hands in the air, and my son came into the computer room and saw it and told the kids about it at school the next day.(Typical Kid) Next thing I know, the teacher at my sons school called in a complaint to CPS, and they come out and investigate me and tell me they are investigating on a sex abuse suspician. They told me that I could be charged for sexual abuse and have to register if they dont dismiss it. They did however after I had to have my friend send in a letter and promised not to send me anything else of that nature,which is ludicrus,and I had to move my computer,which mind you I had no other internet hook up area feesable, I had to send in a letter of reasoning and apologize(For what?) I did nothing wrong, and I had to delete the e-card(no big deal) even though that was all a violation of my personal use and privacy. I was treated like a criminal/sex offender. Mean while I know 5 children who live with a child molester and cant prove it because they wont talk and theres no past charges on his last attempts many years ago. So, first of all, wheres the justice? Why does the system not know what is a real offender verses a non-offender. I know a kid who gave another kid in school a unergarment wedge, and he was charged for it and is on a sex offender registry. I have no clue why these non-violent nude acts/people such as urinating in public and etc. are being charged as sex offenders and having to register. They need to stop waisting there time on these people in court and investigating them when they need to go out there and use all our tax payer money going after the real sex offenders. Take them to court and investigate them on your clock. They need to loosen the laws a bit also on sex-abuse/molestation. If someone is suspected of it due to history and if the kids dont talk but someones aware of that persons nature, we need to beable to do a thourough investigation and investigate the kids to get them out of silence too. Thats why theres to many out there not registered yet. Go get the real offenders and lay off the people with minimal/small character defects. Fine the people for urinating in public and/or punishable up to 10 days in jail. Dont ruin there lives over this registry system.
Reply

Line

3) offenders [by Anonymous Citizen on April 23, 2008]
isnt it time to do something about the list and seperating everyone that is lumped together
Reply

Line

View Full Conversation