Looking at my neighbors vehicle yesterday, I noticed a magnetic sign on the side and focused in to see a franchise RE logo with this person's name on it. I have not spoken to this person since Sept 1988 since he was charged and convicted for indecent liberties with a child. Now he has a temporary salesperson license and a department of corrections number. I am struggling here and ask for advice to stay out of it or make the waves. I don't know if I can live with myself if I should keep quiet and he does this again to someone else. The RE Commission should have known of this on his application and if they did, I assume they did, who in their right mind would issue a license, temporary or not to this person? I am leaning to speaking with the current broker as I will not have anything to do with this person nor will I entertain doing business with him or the blue logo franchise, mls or not.

Will you please weigh in your opinions for me so I might make this a clear headed decision?

Do what you think is right.

In California only certian types of sexual offenders have to register, or are publically viewable on registries.

My husband is a police officer and has informed me of quite a few sex offenders that are Realtors in my old market area.

I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable driving around and going to vacant houses if my client was a sex offender, so I imaging it would go both ways as a Realtor as well.

Do they ask about convictions on your license application? They do in Ohio; any convictions other than minor traffic violations have to be reported on the license application. That kinda blows me away. In Ohio, the application process actually states that applicant is a decent, upstanding citizen (not in those exact words)

Contact your real estate commission and inquire about their requirements to get a license if you have a criminal history of that kind. Take it from there, including contacting your political representatives if need be.

I dont' understand how selling homes has to do with being a sex offender. Sex offenders aren't any different than any other kind of offender. I think that's descrimination.

If you don't wan't anyone with a past criminal history to sell real estate, then it should be worded that way.

Because the drug dealer turned Realtor has just about as much as temptation to sell drugs as a sex offender has of commiting a sex offense. It's a behaviour that they both have to overcome. Whether you personally find one worst than the other, the law obviously shouldn't.

I would check, discretly with the Broker.

As to openmls, most states have a morality clause as well as disclosure to any past criminal convictions.

A sex offender is not someone who got a speeding ticket. It is a person with some serious mental defficiences, similar to a drug dealer.

Thank you all for your thoughts.

While getting my ears lowered last week, the topic of the latest Ramsey suspect or non-suspect came up. Small town barber shops have always been a venue of opinions and at this shop they are sometimes expressed on the outside BB sign.

My barber being former city law enforcement and a current volunteer fireman discussed this with me as his wife is a former REALTOR retired. One of his customers ahead of me asked the name of the company again who hired this convicted sex offender.

Unbeknownst to me at the time, this customer is the father of the co-owner of the brokerage house who partner hired the deviant. The customer is former county fire chief and he was opined that a mistake occured either at the state level and/or on the RE application as may not have been properly noted by applicant. He was going to check in to it and speak with his offspring.

While there is no cracker barrel inside this barber shop, it has shown me it is a place where somethings do get done discreetly.

Whether it is discrimination or self policing would really depend on what your definition of discrimination is openmls. There is no 2nd chance here for a convicted sex offender to show a house and place the public at risk with his past and potentially current deviant behavior.

My ex BIL spend years in prison for attempted murder of his wife (my sister) and of a police officer. Since his release, he's been enjoying a successful career as a Realtor in NV.

He advertises himself as the "honest Realtor" and since child support payments have been court-enforced, he's decided to scale back on his earnings.

I always check my states registry. Mainly because I have small children and I would want to be able to tell them to be extra careful.

"Sex offenders aren't any different than any other kind of offender. I think that's descrimination."

I wish I could be so open minded, but as a father, my mind narrows on this. IL comes with pictures and I was shocked to find out the used car dealer I had been dealing with the last few weeks is a convicted serial rapist. Very dangerous.

My family doesnt rent to people who show up on the registry. They always go on the net when they get an application. Are they legal? I dont really know.

That's one of the stupidest statements I have ever seen on this forum.

The term "sex offender" could mean a lot of things such as an 18 year old who had consenting sex with a 16 year old.

Sex offenders aren't necessarily all horrible people who should be wiped off the face of the earth. And sadly, in some states sex offenders get harsher sentences then murderers on average. That's a pretty stupid state of affairs, where we punish a child molester worse than a murderer.

That's a pretty stupid state of affairs, where we punish a child molester worse than a murderer.

I agree completely. The should get the same penalty. But also think that 18 with a 16 year old has gotten out of hand.

I believe anyone on the sex offender registy should NEVER be issued a license. A supra lockbox clipped on the door or my residence keypad code 24 hours a day could be every bit as deadly as anything I know.

Yes, its discrimation. But its practical, no one wants their home freely accessible to Sex offender. Anyone for turning in all their lockboxes?

It appears as if jflynn does not have any children! Child molesters ARE WORSE THAN MURDERS! For one thing murders don't go on to create other murders! Child molesters do. Now before you get your panties in a bunch NOT ALL CHILDREN THAT HAVE BEEN MOLESTED GROW UP TO MOLEST but a higher percent than the non-molested population do. Also a person that purposely hunts his/her prey(child) and stalks them over a long period of time and REPEATEDLY VIOLATES AN INNOCENT VICTIM is FAR worse than some drunken idiot that gets in a bar fight with another drunken idiot and shoots them. However, I feel NO ONE convicted OF ANY FELONY should be allowed to be a realtor!

In California no one convicted of a felony CAN be a Realtor.

Are you saying in Missouri it is different? That's scary!

I have two children I love dearly. I also used to be a forensic psychometrician (guy who does psychological testing for the courts) involved heavily in the testing and classification of sex offenders. I know far more about the subject than you might think, knowledge based on science and statistics as opposed to your emotional opinions.

And as for your logic, if I were forced to make a choice I'd rather have my children be molested than killed. If you think being dead is better than being the victim of a sex crime then that's your choice although it's not rational. Sex offenders create victims. Murderers create dead people.

ALL AGENTS IN CALIFORNIA CAN READ MORE OF THIS RECENT COURT DECISION BY LOGGING ON TO THE CAR WEBSITE.....Here is the decision in a nutshell:

COURT LIMITS REAL ESTATE COMMISSIONER'S POWER TO REVOKE LICENSE.
The California DRE cannot revoke a real estate license for the commission of any crime. The crime used as a basis for the license revocation must substantially relate to the functions the licensed profession and must be either a felony or a crime involving moral turpitude. This was a ruling of a California appellate court in the recent case of Mr. X vs. DRE (2006 WL 2498015).

The case resolves the interplay between two sections in the CA B&P Code. Section 10177(b) allows the DRE to suspend or revoke a real estate license if the licensee is convicted of or pleads guilty to a felony or a crime involving moral turpitude. Section 490, on the other hand, allows a licensing board, such as the DRE, to suspend or revoke a license if the licsensee has been convicted of a crime substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the licansed profession.

In this case, real estate broker Mr. X pled guilty to misdemeanor battery for a domestic violence incident and no-contest for another incident. Three years later DRE filed a disciplinary action against him because, among other things, he and his then girlfriend gave highly inconsistent accounts of their altercation, the DRE failed to establish clear and convincing evidence that Mr. X "acted with the sort of readiness to do evil, or baseness, vileness or depravity that generally characterize crimes of moral turpitude". The DRE thus conceded that "under the facts of the convictions in this case there is no moral turpitude as required for a misdemeanor under section 10177(b). The Commissioner nevertheless revoked the broker's license by relying solely on Section 490.

Mr. X won in the Court of Appeal with this ruling, "licensing boards enjoyed too much discretion under their licensing statutes, and were exercising it in an arbitrary and standardless fashion to further penalize licensees for crimes that had no bearing on their fitness to practice their profession" The Court of Appeals concluded that Section 490, standing alone, does not authorize DRE to suspend or revoke a salespeson or broker's license but that it must be read in conjunction with 10177(b) which requires underlying nonfelony crimes to involve moral turpitude in order to discipline a licensee.

This article e-mailed to CAR members via their REalegal ends with the statement that the DRE is considering an appeal of the decision to the California Supreme Court.

ummm first of all, you obviously don't have children or know anybody who has been the victim of a sex offender.

acccording to studies at major universities sex offenders on average have a rate of recidivism of 60%. Which statistically means that more than half of those caught are likely to commit the crime again.

Those that experience sexual assualts are generally affected for life and have multitudes of mental, emotional, physical and financial problems for extended periods of their life.

And forcing a young child to perform fellatio when compared to selling a bit of pot or coke is like comparing rubber bullets to nuclear bombs.

Harry Reems, according to Wikipedia, is selling real estate in Park City, Utah.

I am in Kansas too and I think I remember having a background check at some point. I would say this slipped through the cracks and they are unaware of this persons situation. Of course we have a broker in the area that gets away with all sorts of stuff that KREC would normally come down on. What would it hurt to notify KREC and ask how they stand on the issue. I mean sex offenders need to make a living too but you sure wouldnt put one in a daycare. There has to be a line drawn somewhere. And if it violates there rights so what. They dont care about the victims rights. Dont they still cut peoples hands off in some countries for stealing. Imagine what they'd do to a child molester.

In CA, a conviction or nolo gets reported to DRE by the FBI. Depending on your jx, the crime may be one that tends to affect the man's license.

If you make waves, you may put yourself in jeopardy of being sued by the licensee.

Update from the Wizard of Oz...

Background Check and Felon Legislation Hearing on Wednesday in House Commerce and Labor On Wednesday morning at 9:00 a.m., our background check and felon legislation, HB 2295, will be up for a hearing in the House Commerce and Labor Committee.

HB 2295 would require all new applicants for a real estate license to submit a set of fingerprints to the Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for a comprehensive state and national criminal history record check. This would allow the Kansas Real Estate Commission (KREC) to review a complete and thorough criminal history of the applicant when considering whether to grant a real estate license to an applicant.

HB 2295 would also place limitations on the ability of KREC to grant a real estate license to an applicant with a felony conviction in his or her record. For the purposes of this legislation, past felony convictions would be divided into three separate categories. First, KREC would be permanently prohibited from granting a license to an applicant who had pleaded guilty or been convicted of a felony for any offense which would subject them to registration as a sexual or violent offender in the state of Kansas. Second, KREC would be prohibited from granting a real estate license to an applicant who, within the last ten years, had pleaded guilty or been convicted of any crime involving fraud. Third, KREC would be prohibited from granting a real estate license to an applicant who, within the last five years, had pleaded guilty or been convicted of any felony.

I believe this may be on the way of being taken care of...

In SDak you can be added to the SO registry for getting caught peeing outside. Something that was quite common driving home from a bar

"In SDak you can be added to the SO registry for getting caught peeing outside. Something that was quite common driving home from a bar "
With or without customers in the car?

I'm amazed the person was able to get any kind of license, temporary or not. The California Department of Justice does a background investigation with includes the standard FBI query so if the crime occurred anywhere in the country and involved violence it should show up when the applicants finger prints are run in AFIS. I've fairly confident but not 100% certian that a hit on prints would prevent a person from getting any license in Cali.

You know what they say............

Where ever you may be
Let you pee flow free

YOU obviously were never molested as a child. It is a fate worse than death in my opinion. My life has been completely ruined because of being molested by my step father for several years as a young child. I am 39 years old and am still dealing with my past. I am in counseling and have a lot of resentment and anger. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT UNLESS YOU HAVE EXPERIENCED IT YOURSELF!!!!!!! I hope all sex offenders burn in HELL. There is no forgiveness or second chances when it comes to destroying an innocent child's life.

^^I'm really sorry for what you are dealing with and ahve been dealing with your entire life.

There should be no second chances - I agree. It should be an automatic life sentence with no parole and no computer access.

If only it were that simple.

It's strange to think that in many places there aren't standard regulations to prohibit criminals from obtaining a license. As Realtors, we have access to people's private homes and offices. Can you imagine handing a proven robber the keys to several homes in the community? Or have someone convicted of fraud handling large amounts of money, cheques or contracts? Sex offenders are no different. Realtors are often in situations where we are alone with people in a private residence. Offenders should not be given the chance to re-offend, especially when there are licensing procedures already in place.
Realtors have access to people's private homes. By giving known criminals a license you are giving them the chance to take advantage. The purpose of licensing is to obtain some type of professionalism- to protect the public.
Unfortunately, if you do the crime- you have to suffer the consequences of your actions. It is unfair to the public to allow criminals such privileged access. While there are always exceptions, or people who have managed to reform themselves- it is still in the best interest of the public to do background checks on all licensees.
I think people should contact their state or provincial licensing boards and demand that background checks be mandatory for their licensees if they don't already exist. It just makes sense.

Let me just say that I know Mr. X personally! He was setup by his ex-wife and ex-girlfriend after he broke up the relationships with them. Then he fired a troubled individual from his company and sure enough this individual teamed up with the ex-wife and ex-girlfriend. As a matter of fact, I have contacted Mr. X and his investigator has proven that most of the people in this forum are those mentioned above.

To the others, Mr. X is a VERY SUCCESSFUL REAL ESTATE BROKER that has made the mistake of associating himself with people like this. As a matter of fact, if two of these individuals did not have a little more in their bank account to chip in for rent with their roommattes, I am sure that Mr. X would be suing them by now. I am personally involved to ensure that this injustice does not continue and will contact Mr. X at once.

This is where the crime comes in: Those of you that have referred to Mr. X as a Sex Offender have now opened exposed yourselves to being sued for everything you have!!! If you read the case, you will determine that these case have nothing to do with SEX. Furthermore, Mr. X has been raising his children as a single father and has been granted PRIMARY CUSTODY of his two children for the last 5+ years now. Why do you think that is the case!

AgentsOnline.Com you should do your own investigation as to EVERYONE on this forum and expect to be subpeoneod for their information. It is obvious these people still can't seem to continue on with their lives without having some association with Mr. X.

Hello ~

I don't believe people can be sued for re-posting articles regarding a case or for sharing personal opinions and experiences. Your post brings up a couple of questions for me, however.

Is this person's character such that he continually aligns himself or associates with malicious people? Or is there something about him that makes an otherwise non-vindictive person to want to go to those lengths to get him in trouble?

You may know him personally but you may not be aware of who he is in private. People don't ordinarily share their "other" side freely and openly. Perhaps there is a reason for the charges?

Linda

I don't understand how quoting public records is going to result in charges...

From what I see, there is only one post in this thread about Mr.X (a reprinted article) and I don't see any that refer to him as a sex offender specifically, or even refer to that post at ALL, so I don't really understand where you are going with that either.
Also, you contradict yourself when in the top of the post you say you have already contacted Mr. X and then you say later in the post that you will contact him at once. Which is it?

I can tell you that I have no idea who this Mr. X person is at all (I'm in Canada), and have no personal connection to him. I would think that if all the people in this forum were in cohoots with the exes (as you allege), they would have said more damaging things than reprinting one article.

If you have already "proven that most of the people in this forum are those mentioned above (referring to the exes)" than why the need to subpeona the people in the forum for their information? Your post makes NO sense at all to me.

Your threats of lawsuits are particularly offensive to me as an innocent poster in this forum. You have now tarred us all as somehow conspiring towards this person and made us all look bad. If you have real issue with this thread or a posting, you should speak to the moderators and ask them to remove offensive materials instead of making idle threats at innocent people and slandering an entire group. If what you say is true, you should have no trouble coming up with the evidence to have it removed.

I am incredibly offended at your insinuations and threats.

Let me reply to your posting:

People can ABSOLUTELY be sued for calling someone a sex offender when there is nothing in his legal case that is supportive of that! Would you like for someone to call you a sex offender because you got a traffic ticket a few years ago? Just look at the title of this forum!!

I didn't know that this was a forum about psychology!!!! However, I can tell you that you are absolutely correct that these people have gone to those great lengths...because of jealousy of this person's success in real estate and their vindictive nature comes from the fact that they are no longer able to share this person's wealth, knowledge about real estate, or company (friendship).

As I said, I know this person personally and know that he is one of the nicest men, classy gentleman, and successful real estate professional, that has been granted primary custody of his children. How many times have you met men whom have been granted primary custody of their children and are raising them for 15+ years now!!!

It is quite interesting that you go to great lengths to represent yourself as someone in Canada(where it is difficult to prosecute fr. U.S.) and then try to modify the facts by making false allegations and proclaiming that you are now a victim....so let me reply.

Let me clarify to the most elementary level. The author of this post clearly referred to this person as a sex offender. Are you really not able to see the title of this posting??

Why would you go through such effort to find discrepancies in someones posting that you SAY that you don't know or know of. I guess you fell right into that trap didn't you?

As for your allegation that I said that people are in cahoots with the execs of this forum, I don't understand how you could possibly come to that conclusion from what I wrote!!! I clearly stated three individuals!!!

If you are truly an innocent poster on this forum, how would you like to be surfing the net and find a posting like this about someone that you know personally and respect as being one of the best human beings that you have ever met and VERY SUCCESSFUL IN REAL ESTATE TOO!!!

Rather than recognizing the false insinuations and postings in this forum - which are so clear, you are trying to make personal claims of being a victim of MY posting. I am quite perplexed at your posture!!!

Let me clarify something for you. Firstly, I never posted anything alleging this person was anything. My post had nothing to do with Mr. X at all. Secondly, I find your threats and anger completely misdirected and unnecessary. If you have a problem with the postings, notify the moderators, don't make threats at people or allege that they are part of some sort of conspiracy.



Where could I get this from??? Let's see, perhaps your statement saying this:


That makes EVERYONE in this thread look suspicious and slanders us all negatively. Stop making ridiculous postings and calm down. You can have the post deleted if you think it is innapropriate and take all the legal actions you want.