do you really know your neighbor?

[ChriswUfGator]

100+ "misunderstood" guys (and yes there are some women folk in that mix also) in 1 square mile is a whole lot of misunderstanding.  and yes i am well aware there are MANY cases of "wrong place, wrong "girl", but what is an "acceptable" age?  
obviously dan didn't jump to conclusions when he found out about the guy around the block that fell into the wrong place/wrong time.  back to the, get to know who lives around you.

And these online "registry" sites don't give you anywhere NEAR enough information to tell the difference.

I disagree.

Using my earlier examples, and the link I provided to the FDLE site, I learned the following

The Predator was only 20, but he was convicted of 794.011(3)  Commits Sexual Battery; Upon Person 12 Or Older Without Consent And In Process Threatens Or Uses Deadly Weapon Or Force Which Would Most Likely Cause Serious Personal Injury

(3)  A person who commits sexual battery upon a person 12 years of age or older, without that person's consent, and in the process thereof uses or threatens to use a deadly weapon or uses actual physical force likely to cause serious personal injury commits a life felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, s. 775.084, or s. 794.0115

(1)  As used in this chapter:

(a)  "Consent" means intelligent, knowing, and voluntary consent and does not include coerced submission. "Consent" shall not be deemed or construed to mean the failure by the alleged victim to offer physical resistance to the offender.

(g)  "Serious personal injury" means great bodily harm or pain, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement. 

(h)  "Sexual battery" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object; however, sexual battery does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

Winner #2 was 46 at the time of conviction and committed 794.011(2)(a)  Person 18 Or Older Commits Sexual Battery And/Or Injures Sexual Organs Of A Victim Less Than 12

(2)(a)  A person 18 years of age or older who commits sexual battery upon, or in an attempt to commit sexual battery injures the sexual organs of, a person less than 12 years of age commits a capital felony, punishable as provided in ss. 775.082 and 921.141.


(1)  As used in this chapter:

(h)  "Sexual battery" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object; however, sexual battery does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.
794.011(2)(b)  Person Under 18 Commits Sexual Battery Upon Or Injures Sexual Organs Of A Victim Less Than 12

(2)(b)  A person less than 18 years of age who commits sexual battery upon, or in an attempt to commit sexual battery injures the sexual organs of, a person less than 12 years of age commits a life felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082,s. 775.083, s. 775.084, or s. 794.0115.


(1)  As used in this chapter:

(h)  "Sexual battery" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object; however, sexual battery does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

and the last person was 40 at the time of conviction and was convicted of 800.04  Lewdly Fondle Or Assault, Commit Or Simulate Sexual Acts On Or In Presence Of A Child Under 16 In A Lewd, Lascivious Or Indecent Manner

A person who: 

(1)  Handles, fondles, or assaults any child under the age of 16 years in a lewd, lascivious, or indecent manner;

(2)  Commits actual or simulated sexual intercourse, deviate sexual intercourse, sexual bestiality, masturbation, sadomasochistic abuse, actual lewd exhibition of the genitals, or any act or conduct which simulates that sexual battery is being or will be committed upon any child under the age of 16 years or forces or entices the child to commit any such act; 

(3)  Commits an act defined as sexual battery under s. 794.011(1)(h) upon any child under the age of 16 years; or 

(4)  Knowingly commits any lewd or lascivious act in the presence of any child under the age of 16 years, without committing the crime of sexual battery, commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. Neither the victim's lack of chastity nor the victim's consent is a defense to the crime proscribed by this section. A mother's breastfeeding of her baby does not under any circumstance violate this section.


I would say there is plenty of information on the FDLE site.

First off, you have to compare the revision history of the statute against the conviction date. As I've said in my other posts, the laws related to this issue change relatively constantly in this state. The current version of that statute that you're quoting may not be (and probably is not) the same terms that the "offender" was actually convicted under.

So what was the conviction date? Odds are, at that time, he was 20 and the "victim" only had to be so much as a day under 18 in order to convict him. This appears to be another example of the same B.S. I was referring to when I originally refuted your statements.

So you've just acknowledged, then, that your research has determined that this particular "gem" (using your own sarcastic word), was 20 and committed a "sex crime" against a victim OVER the age of 12. So there goes the "baby raper" idea. And how much you wanna bet this was another situation where the guy's girlfriend was a year or two younger than him or whatever? Real BIG "sex crime" there.

This was my original point in the first place. Most of the people on these registries aren't really "sex offenders", unless you consider a 20 year old having sex with an 18 year old a crime. I don't.

[tashi]

A friend of mine has the label "sex offender" for life. He was accused by a 16 year old girl of sexual assault and he was convicted. Ten years later, the "victim" said she lied about the whole incident and has attempted to help my friend get the charges removed. The state does not care and has refused to help remove this stigma.

I find it sad people pass judgment and don't know the whole story, they just believe what they are told.

Everyone calling these people out reminds me of witch hunting.

[ChriswUfGator]

I don't know if this story is true or not, but it does serve to illustrate a point.  

A man in south Florida was playing golf with friends.  He was old enough to have some minor prostate problems.  He had an urgent need to relieve himself so he stepped off the course into the surrounding brush to do so.  A woman in a house next to the golf course saw him and called the police, telling them that a man was exposing himself behind her house.  He was arrested, convicted of the misdemeanor and is now a registered "sex offender".

That happens all the time. It depends on the discretion of the police officer. He could have been charged with public urination, which is not considered a "sex offense", or he could have been charged with indecent exposure which is considered a "sex offense".

Depending on how the officer wanted to do things, the guy either gets a fine and goes home, or he gets a fine and goes home, then is a registered "sex offender". It's pathetic.

[Dog Walker]

Chris or anyone, how does the law define the difference between a sex offender and a sexual predator?  Are they always on the same list?

[ChriswUfGator]

After researching age of offender, offense and date of adjudication and then allowing for a couple years to work through the court system, these are the ones that I came up with in the general proximity of Hist Spr who I believe Cindi is referring to. If you have children, I would be aware of these addresses and these faces. Except maybe Yvonne who it sounds might have flashed someone at the wrong time when kids were around. She was approx 35, at some point you need to consider the consequences. I see now that the links didn't include in my paste. If you want to know a specific link let me know and I will get it.

Chavlis Taiwaun Williams
Address: 1616 Silver St
Crime: Abuse Of Child,Eng Sex Perfm; F.S. 827.071(2) (Principal)
Date of birth: 1975-12-04
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
05/12/1999   ABUSE OF CHILD,ENG SEX PERFM; F.S. 827.071(2) (PRINCIPAL)
9902368   DUVAL, FL
Adjudication Withheld

Dale Harlan Benchoff
Address: 2504 N Laura St
Crime: Sex Bat By Adult/Vctm Under 12; F.S. 794.011(2) (Principal In Attempt); sex Bat By Adult/Vctm Under 12; F.S. 794.011(2) (Principal In Attempt)
Date of birth: 1949-05-05
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
09/26/1995   SEX BAT BY ADULT/VCTM UNDER 12; F.S. 794.011(2) (PRINCIPAL IN ATTEMPT)
9301121   PUTNAM, FL
Guilty/convict
09/26/1995   SEX BAT BY ADULT/VCTM UNDER 12; F.S. 794.011(2) (PRINCIPAL IN ATTEMPT)
9301099   PUTNAM, FL
Guilty/convict

Emory Carl Barnes
Address: 2058 N Market St
Crime: Sex Batt/Coerce Child By Adult; F.S. 794.011(2)(B) (Principal)
Date of birth: 1953-01-12
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
08/22/1991   SEX BATT/COERCE CHILD BY ADULT; F.S. 794.011(2)(b) (PRINCIPAL)
9106186   DUVAL, FL
Not Available

Eric Althea Lewis
Address: 1949 Hubbard St
Crime: Sex Bat/Inj Not Likely; F.S. 794.011(5); false Imprison Any Other; F.S. 787.02
Date of birth: 1956-02-21
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
07/26/2000   SEX BAT/INJ NOT LIKELY; F.S. 794.011(5)
9902007   ST JOHNS, FL
Guilty/convict
07/26/2000   FALSE IMPRISON ANY OTHER; F.S. 787.02
9902007   ST JOHNS, FL
Guilty/convict

Francis Joseph Suriano
Address: 205 E 1st St Apt 3
Crime: Lewd,Lascivious Child U/16; F.S. 800.04 (Principal)
Date of birth: 1952-12-12
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
04/05/2000   LEWD,LASCIVIOUS CHILD U/16; F.S. 800.04 (PRINCIPAL)
9401707   CLAY, FL
Not Available

George Howard Jones
Address: 1531 Ionia St
Crime: Sex Bat By Adult/Vctm Under 12; F.S. 794.011(2) (Principal In Attempt)
Date of birth: 1954-09-15
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
10/09/2001   SEX BAT BY ADULT/VCTM UNDER 12; F.S. 794.011(2) (PRINCIPAL IN ATTEMPT)
0108471   DUVAL, FL
Guilty/convict

Harry Lawrence Gordon
Address: 1924 Hubbard St
Crime: Lewd,Lascivious Child U/16; F.S. 800.04 (Principal)
Date of birth: 1957-12-15
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
12/03/1996   LEWD,LASCIVIOUS CHILD U/16; F.S. 800.04 (PRINCIPAL)
9612265   DUVAL, FL
Not Available

Henry Frank Smith
Address: 1153 Walnut St Apt 3
Crime: Sex Offense, Other State (Lewd Or Lascivious Acts With A Child Under 14)
Date of birth: 1952-01-30
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
08/24/1987   SEX OFFENSE, OTHER STATE (LEWD OR LASCIVIOUS ACTS WITH A CHILD UNDER 14)
CR88816   SAN DIEGO, CA    Guilty/convict



James Edward Carter
Address: 945 N Liberty St # 115
Crime: Sex Offense, Other State (Rape Of A Child)
Date of birth: 1953-01-26
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
10/03/1990   SEX OFFENSE, OTHER STATE (RAPE OF A CHILD)
Not Available   KING, WA    Guilty/convict

Jerald Oneal Cowart
Address: 239 W 10th St
Crime: Lewd,Lascivious Child U/16; F.S. 800.04 (Principal)
Date of birth: 1956-12-13
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
04/26/1996   LEWD,LASCIVIOUS CHILD U/16; F.S. 800.04 (PRINCIPAL)
9604062   DUVAL, FL
Adjudication Withheld

Jerome Watts Sr
Address: 1421 N Liberty St
Crime: Lewd Or Lascivious Conduct Victim Under 16 Years Old By Offender 18 Years Or Older; F.S. 800.04(6)(B (Principal)
Date of birth: 1968-09-13
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
09/06/2001   Lewd or lascivious conduct victim under 16 years old by offender 18 years or older; F.S. 800.04(6)(b (PRINCIPAL)
0103300   DUVAL, FL
Guilty/convict

Joe Nathan Walls
Address: 329 E 1st St # 202
Crime: Lewd,Lascivious Child U/16; F.S. 800.04 (Principal)
Date of birth: 1963-05-11
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
05/24/1996   LEWD,LASCIVIOUS CHILD U/16; F.S. 800.04 (PRINCIPAL)
9603482   DUVAL, FL
Not Available

Leon Caldwell
Address: 1507 Ionia St
Crime: Sex Bat By Adult/Vctm Under 12; F.S. 794.011(2)
Date of birth: 1963-02-12
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
05/20/2003   SEX BAT BY ADULT/VCTM UNDER 12; F.S. 794.011(2)
0302284   DUVAL, FL
Guilty/convict

Neil Christian Allen
Address: 1924 N Market St
Crime: Lewd Aslt/Sex Bat Vctm<16; F.S. 800.04(3) (Principal)
Date of birth: 1976-02-04
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
05/27/1999   LEWD ASLT/SEX BAT VCTM<16; F.S. 800.04(3) (PRINCIPAL)
9903919   DUVAL, FL
Not Available

Oliver Nelson Jr
Address: 1631 Hubbard St
Crime: Lewd Or Lascivious Battery Victim 12-15 Years Old; F.S. 800.04(4) (Principal)
Date of birth: 1940-08-28
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
06/28/2001   Lewd or lascivious battery victim 12-15 years old; F.S. 800.04(4) (PRINCIPAL)
0013321   DUVAL, FL
Guilty/convict

Ricardo Eugene Mathews
Address: 136 Phelps St Apt 4
Crime: Lewd,Lascivious Child U/16; F.S. 800.04; lewd,Lascivious Child U/16; F.S. 800.04 (Principal)
Date of birth: 1953-02-28
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
08/19/1993   LEWD,LASCIVIOUS CHILD U/16; F.S. 800.04
93008493   DUVAL, FL
Guilty/convict
08/25/1993   LEWD,LASCIVIOUS CHILD U/16; F.S. 800.04 (PRINCIPAL)
9308493   DUVAL, FL
Guilty/convict

Rodrick Keith Young
Address: 1912 Walnut St
Crime: Lewd Or Lascivious Battery Victim 12-15 Years Old; F.S. 800.04(4); sex Offnder Fail Comply Registration; F.S. 943.0435(9)
Date of birth: 1981-09-09
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
05/23/2001   Lewd or lascivious battery victim 12-15 years old; F.S. 800.04(4)
0105234   DUVAL, FL
Adjudication Withheld

Willie Charles Mccullough
Address: 1615 N Laura St
Crime: Lewd,Lascivious Child U/16; F.S. 800.04 (Principal)
Date of birth: 1944-11-15
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
12/07/1990   LEWD,LASCIVIOUS CHILD U/16; F.S. 800.04 (PRINCIPAL)
9012856   DUVAL, FL
Not Available

Willie James Moore
Address: 1031 N Liberty St
Crime: Sex Bat By Adult/Vctm Under 12; F.S. 794.011(2) (Principal In Attempt)
Date of birth: 1962-08-17
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
06/03/1997   SEX BAT BY ADULT/VCTM UNDER 12; F.S. 794.011(2) (PRINCIPAL IN ATTEMPT)
9212555   DUVAL, FL
Not Available

Yvonne Shavon Satterfield (perhaps she flashed her business around kids, at 35 she might have known better)
Address: 451 E 7th St
Crime: Lewd Or Lascivious Exhibition Victim Under 16 Years Old Offender 18 Or Older; F.S. 800.04(7)(C) (Principal)
Date of birth: 1965-06-29
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
05/09/2001   Lewd or lascivious exhibition victim under 16 years old offender 18 or older; F.S. 800.04(7)(c) (PRINCIPAL)
0100268   DUVAL, FL
Guilty/convict

So let me get this straight...

Out of the 115 registered "sex offenders" in that geographic area, that list of 20 or so represents the ones who are actually child molesters?

I think your research has provided a great public service to the neighborhood. But surely, even you must admit, 20 out of 115 is not a great ratio when we're talking about how many people on the "sex offender" registry are actually sex offenders...

[nvrenuf]

Tashi, I'm sorry to hear of your friend's unfortunate situation with a liar. I also had a friend under similar circumstances but the case was dropped before conviction and he is no longer listed. The state not being willing to help your friend sucks big time and it is unfair.

But I also believe many of these are legitimate and the parents of children who were forever damaged by these people probably wish now that they had done more "witch hunting". You can apologize for thinking the worst of someone but how do you apologize to your kid for not taking every precaution you could?

[ChriswUfGator]

Chris or anyone, how does the law define the difference between a sex offender and a sexual predator?  Are they always on the same list?

Externally (e.g. to the public) they're pretty much one and the same. These registries that are released to the public don't tell you whether the guy got convicted for some dumb$h!t BS like sending a text message, or whether he's actually a child-molester. That's the whole problem, from both a public safety standpoint and from a civil rights standpoint. The current system has the person who actually is a child molester getting lumped into the same list and press releases as the guy who got arrested for pissing on the golf course. It's preposterous.

That's why nvrenuf had to do his own research and come up with a list of how many of Springfield's registered "sex offenders" actually are sex offenders. Internally, I'm sure law enforcement and the probation officers responsible for overseeing address updates, compliance with these new zoning restrictions (e.g., not within 1000 feet of a school, church, or pretty much anywhere else in town, depending on the city), etc., have their own scoring system for how risky these people really are. But we don't have access to that.

[nvrenuf]

So let me get this straight...

Out of the 115 registered "sex offenders" in that geographic area, that list of 20 or so represents the ones who are actually child molesters?

I think your research has provided a great public service to the neighborhood. But surely, even you must admit, 20 out of 115 is not a great ratio when we're talking about how many people on the "sex offender" registry are actually sex offenders...

Out of the 189 for the 32206, I first attempted to narrow down to the ones that were in Hist Spr proper. That dropped the number quite a bit. Tons more just on the other side of the railroad tracks or a few blocks north and/or east. Then I attempted to only pull out those that seemed to fit the child molester scenario. Obviously as long as a molester has mobility, any child could be at risk. But I was trying to show those that might live near by that a child might believe they could trust due to familiarity of seeing them often.

Actually I was unpleasantly surprised to see how many did NOT fall into the wrong place/barely wrong age difference scenario. And in that regard I'm referring to the entire 32206 list.

[ChriswUfGator]

Tashi, I'm sorry to hear of your friend's unfortunate situation with a liar. I also had a friend under similar circumstances but the case was dropped before conviction and he is no longer listed. The state not being willing to help your friend sucks big time and it is unfair.

I think most people know someone who's been caught up in some ridiculous BS like that, including a close friend of mine. If he didn't have the financial resources to hire a lawyer and defend himself proactively, he too would have found himself on the registry. And he doesn't belong there, the situation was ridiculous.

[ChriswUfGator]

So let me get this straight...

Out of the 115 registered "sex offenders" in that geographic area, that list of 20 or so represents the ones who are actually child molesters?

I think your research has provided a great public service to the neighborhood. But surely, even you must admit, 20 out of 115 is not a great ratio when we're talking about how many people on the "sex offender" registry are actually sex offenders...

Out of the 189 for the 32206, I first attempted to narrow down to the ones that were in Hist Spr proper. That dropped the number quite a bit. Tons more just on the other side of the railroad tracks or a few blocks north and/or east. Then I attempted to only pull out those that seemed to fit the child molester scenario. Obviously as long as a molester has mobility, any child could be at risk. But I was trying to show those that might live near by that a child might believe they could trust due to familiarity of seeing them often.

Actually I was unpleasantly surprised to see how many did NOT fall into the wrong place/barely wrong age difference scenario. And in that regard I'm referring to the entire 32206 list.

So how many were you comparing overall, to ultimately narrow it down to the 20 who were actual child molesters?

[nvrenuf]

Overall comparison was 189 for all of 32206. Are you asking for the total # listed as offenders in Hist Spr? If so that will take me some time. Again.

[ChriswUfGator]

Overall comparison was 189 for all of 32206. Are you asking for the total # listed as offenders in Hist Spr? If so that will take me some time. Again.

You've already gone through a lot of trouble doing the research that you've done, which is truly helpful to the neighborhood. So I really don't want to put you out even more. Also, you clearly recognize the problem I'm referring to, which is why you researched to make your own list in the first place.

I was just trying to get a handle on how many you had to weed out to get the 20 who were actually child molesters. Even a rough guess would probably serve just fine, for discussion purposes.

[cindi]

the point from the whole thing was that many people in many neighborhoods have absolutely no idea who lives next to them.  i was amazed at how many people were amazed that there were over a hundred "sex offenders" in a 5 mile radius of the orange park address.  and, the website does specifically identify predators. 
whether you think that it's alright to have sex with a 15.95 year old or whatever isn't the issue, and it is NOT an issue about rooming houses or single family houses it is about the fact that there are still 20 what some would think of as "not socially acceptable sex offenders".  that is still almost 1 per block in springfield.   

[tufsu1]

No one is arguing that there aren't sex offenders who are mis-labeled or that some of them aren't scum.

But, some of them are.

But you had no issue with the term "baby raper" and thought that all of them should rot in jail....this is the problem with blanket statements.

[ChriswUfGator]

Also, nvrenuf, I'm not trying to be picky, but on your list I think the following were probably wrong place/time or age "gotcha" situations:

Rodrick Keith Young
Address: 1912 Walnut St
Crime: Lewd Or Lascivious Battery Victim 12-15 Years Old; F.S. 800.04(4); sex Offnder Fail Comply Registration; F.S. 943.0435(9)
Date of birth: 1981-09-09
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
05/23/2001   Lewd or lascivious battery victim 12-15 years old; F.S. 800.04(4)
0105234   DUVAL, FL
Adjudication Withheld

This kid was only 19 on the date of his final adjudication in May 2001. Then speaking realistically, the "offense" likely occurred at least a year or two prior to that, perhaps even longer. Once you waive speedy trial, things can really drag out. So looking at the information, the "offenders" birth date is September of 1981, and then taking the victim's age range according to the original charge under FS 800.04, it appears this was probably a 16 or 17 year old kid with a 15 year old kid. To put it in perspective, that's a high school freshman dating a high school junior or sophomore. Unless you have more information on this one, I doubt this was really a "sex crime".

Chavlis Taiwaun Williams
Address: 1616 Silver St
Crime: Abuse Of Child,Eng Sex Perfm; F.S. 827.071(2) (Principal)
Date of birth: 1975-12-04
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
05/12/1999   ABUSE OF CHILD,ENG SEX PERFM; F.S. 827.071(2) (PRINCIPAL)
9902368   DUVAL, FL
Adjudication Withheld

This one is also likely a wrong place/time situation. Apparently the judge agreed with me, considering the withhold of adjudication, in both this case and the one above.

This guy has a December of 1975 birth date, and an adjudication date of May 1999. As of the date of conviction, the kid was only 23, and the actual incident probably occurred at least a year or two or three prior to that date. The statute he was cited under at that time required only that the "victim" be <18. So in all likelihood, this could have been a 19 or 20 year old kid with a 17 year old kid. Again, unless you have more information on this one, I don't consider that a "sex crime".

Neil Christian Allen
Address: 1924 N Market St
Crime: Lewd Aslt/Sex Bat Vctm<16; F.S. 800.04(3) (Principal)
Date of birth: 1976-02-04
Based on this official offender page
Adjudication Date   Crime Description    Court Case Number    Jurisdiction & State   Adjudication
05/27/1999   LEWD ASLT/SEX BAT VCTM<16; F.S. 800.04(3) (PRINCIPAL)
9903919   DUVAL, FL
Not Available

Same deal as above. Looking at the dates, this could well have been an 18 or 19 year old kid with a 15 or almost-16 year old kid. I doubt this was really what most people would consider a "sex crime".

Also, as a side note, my date ranges are assuming the "incidents" (if you can call them that) were reported the same day as they occurred. Which is almost certainly not the case. Assuming you don't waive speedy trial, then it takes 6 months to get to trial, and it could still conceivably be a year or longer by the time sentencing rolls around. If the defendant does waive speedy trial, then all bets are off, and these things can really drag out awhile, depending on discovery, etc. So if you start adding the statute of limitations on top of all of that, then these "offenders" could very well have been (and, looking at the dates, quite likely were) very close to the "victim's" ages.

Again, unless there is some additional information, it would appear these aren't child molestation cases, or even what most normal people would consider a "sex crime".