This is one of the best articles I have ever read on the subject. I applaud the author for having the courage to write and publish it.

To the previous comment writers: I do not think the writer is sympathetic to this person, nor is sympathy for him the point of the article. Rather, the take-away points are that this is a very complex matter needing an intelligent approach that is based in research and results and can respond to the shades of grey instead of just dealing in the black and white of our current knee-jerk, unenlightened, dogma based approach.

(Much like the european "harm reduction approach" to drug abuse issues is prefferable to our "War on Drugs" with it's expensive, counter-productive, and unnecessarily punative approach.)

Also, the piece makes the point that the current system does not neessarily make the public any safer and might even be making the public less safe! (For example: ostracism can delay or prevent the offenders among us from achieving true rehabilitation as productive mebers of society.)

There are offenders who's stories are substantially more sympathetic than this person's, I agree. But this person is rare in his willingness to share (parts of) his story with the public-at-large. The truth is almost all sex offenders are not dangerous. The 12 year sex-crime recitivism rate of registered sex offenders is under 10% . That means the vast majority (over 90%) of sex offenders do not go on to commit another sex crime. (This study did not count failing to register as a sex crime.) If you do not count registration offenses, the overall recitivism rate of sex offenders is lower than that of the felony offender overall population.

As to the question of whether this guy remains dangerous, one would have to know him personally to say. Or, perhaps some enlighenment may come from a statistical analysis of the recitivism trends of those sex offenders who's known perdictors are comparable to his known predictors. In any event, he certainly does give me the creeps... But, I also can see the possibility that he was just a dweeb who needed a good smack-down in the boundries department.

Plus, people can (and do) mature, change and grow up. Being in my 40's, I am certainly now repulsed by (and diametrically opposed to) some of the attitudes, behavior and choices from my 20s.

not4sexoffenders: Your response is typical, "Thank god for sex offender registration. Im sure some people get the short end of the stick but I'd rather take the risk and know who's out there."
So, you acknowledge that the system is unfair because you "want to know who's out there"? Why? It won't make any difference (studies show) and you minimize the negative effects on real people that result from these efforts to stigmatize them. I hope you get falsely accused by an angry woman (common) of some bs and have to register as an offender for life. See how it feels, jerk.

I didn't even read the whole article yet I'm gonna tell you all my opinion on it, cause I'm sure you're all dying to know how I feel about it, right?! I mean, that's why you read all the way to the end, just so you could get to the comments section and read half-assed recaps of the article you just read by lazy and commentators who can barely read, no?

Insight into what goes on in the mind of a sex-offender.Interesting read,what is natural and innocent for the sex-offender is something horrible for the normal person.

I am curious why we feel that a murderer or armed home invasion robber etc. (as long as sex was not involved), can serve his time and is let free into society without any notification even though these people also are known to re-offend. They are allowed to re-integrate with society having paid their debt to society. I don't understand the inequity of mandate.

I find it interesting that commenters are repeating HIS characterization of his actions. To wit, "I kissed her" vs "his head/hand were between my legs".

This guy was escalating and needs to be watched. He takes no responsibility for actions. The only reason he hasn't touched a kid is because he needs easy access. CMs start out slowly, with someone they know who trusts them. If he had access to a kid, I shudder to think what he would have done.

Nevertheless, a more realistic classification system is needed and more treatment for alc/drug problems that cloud judgment.

To get your ex back contact to black magic expert.

While I can appreciate the idea that Mart's criminal background doesn't fit the stereotype of a Level 3 Sex Offender... I cringe at the thought of just not designating a man as a continued threat to women in his environment (which, based on the interviews, appears very clearly to be) ... because others essentially don't understand it.

This is a failure in educating the public, not a failure in the label.

@16: I'd wonder if it's both. If you need such a labelling system (we don't bother with one up here), perhaps there should be a level in between 2 & 3. Or, perhaps someone who's offended 2x in 16 years should be a level 2. I dunno. Being able to downgrade people over time seems like it'd be a helpful thing as well.

Level 1 (low risk of repeat offense), or
Level 2 (moderate risk of repeat offense), or
Level 3 (high risk of repeat offense and a threat to public safety exists).