The courts have the knowledge that shaming is a form of punishment as defined by the Court cases of People v. Meyer and People v. Lowe, 606 N.E.2d. People v. Molz, 113 N.E.2d, People v. Johnson 528 N.E.2d, State v. Burdin 924 S.W.2d ,People v. Letterlough 655 N.E.2d, Lindsay v. State 606 So. 2D.
While a conviction for a crime may extinguish a person’s rights to be free and confine them to a 8 x 10 cell for periods of up to 14 to 20 hours a day,. our Constitution guarantees as part of the eighth amendment, the prohibiting of cruel and unusual punishments. Prisoners in the custody of the state, who are being punished, have a right to be safe from other inmates and to receive medical care because they are in the custody of the state and cannot take care of themselves.
Since the legislature has chosen to notify the communities of the presence of registrants within the community and the result of that notification is that the registrants and their families are placed at risk of harassment, threats, vandalism and violence within the community, would the the state not have the obligation under the eighth amendment to make sure that the results of their legislation does not cause physical or emotional harm to the registered citizens or their families?
It would seem that creating laws to make this group protected under the hate crimes legislation would be a good start.. The legislature should also create balanced laws that allow registered citizens to find work and housing so that they can provide for themselves and their families. After all, it is these same legislators that have created community notification that have led to all of the unmindful consequences that community notification has caused. Or better yet, isn’t it time to eliminate these consequences by eliminating community notification through the Internet publishing of the registry and by doing so, Stop the Shaming?
1 comment for “Shaming through a legislative act is no different than shaming through a court decision.”