Sex-offender law leaves loopholes

It's getting harder to see exactly how the recently passed Sex Offender Accountability and Protection of Minors Act of 2006 is going to make children in South Carolina safer - especially since it says 14-year-olds can consent to sex.

Proponents proclaimed success and told us they had done a great thing when the bill passed. They told us a bright red line had been drawn, that certain two-time sexual predators would receive the ultimate price for damaging our children, a death sentence, even though prosecutors and defense attorneys said such a provision would make it more difficult to secure convictions in some cases.

"If you cross these certain lines, there are absolute consequences," Gov. Mark Sanford told me. "That's something I can live with."

We will be living with repercussions from the law as well, the kinds that won't be good for victims. A last-minute addition to the bill, which came without public debate, gives alleged sex offenders the option of the so-called "mistake of age" defense. It allows adults to claim they believed the child with whom they had sex was of age, according to The Associated Press.

That means a jury now has to weigh an argument that never should have a legal leg to stand on. When an adult makes a decision to have sex, they must know with whom they are sleeping. There should be no excuses, but because of this law, now there are.

Instead of the bright red line legislators claimed the law would create, it has opened potentially disastrous loopholes that could give sexual predators a way to avoid prosecution for having sex with children as young as 12. And a "Romeo clause" means an 18-year-old can have consensual sex with a 14-year-old.

"For parents struggling to send the right message to their kids in a sex-obsessed world, the state of South Carolina now says it's all right for a 14-year-old to have sex," Seventh Circuit prosecutor Trey Gowdy told the Spartanburg Herald-Journal.

The bill does some good. It includes long-term electronic monitoring, longer prison sentences and gives parole officers the ability to stop offenders from moving into their victim's neighborhood. The attempt to shield teenagers from harsh punishment seemed reasonable.

The lesson in all of this? Be wary any time the General Assembly pushes for an unnecessary but popular law during an election year to "protect the children." Crimes against children have been on the decline for years.

Irrational reasons always make for irrational laws.

ONLINE | For past columns and to read Bailey's blog, go to MyrtleBeachOnline.com.

Contact ISSAC J. BAILEY at ibailey@thesunnews.com or 626-0357.