Michael's Story

Texas Voices | home

Michael's Story

It was the spring of his senior year in high school. Michael was a great kid who had never been in any kind of trouble at school or anywhere else. He made very good grades and was very active in his church youth group. He did not really date but hung out mostly with kids from church and the golf team. He had been on the varsity golf team for two years and did very well. One of his golf teammates invited Michael to go on a spring break youth ski trip with his church. He was very excited about it.

The trip was a lot of fun. Michael met a lot of new kids. He took lots of pictures to show his family. On the bus trip coming home one of the girls on the trip came and sat by him. She asked if he would mail her copies of some of the group pictures he had taken. She gave him her address and they talked for a big part of the trip home. She was 14 and although he thought she was really pretty and acted older, he really gave her very little thought until she began calling him after the trip. She kept inviting him over to her home in a nearby city. Michael told her no, not without her parent's permission. Finally he agreed to meet and talk with her parents. He told them that he was 18 and would soon be 19 and that he would not date their daughter if they did not approve. They gave them permission to date and in fact encouraged the relationship. The mother told Michael that she thought it was better for girls to date older guys, that she herself had dated a 23 year old when she was 15. The only comment the father ever made was just to not get her pregnant.

These two began dating and quickly fell head over heels for each other. They talked of getting married in seven years when they had both completed college. Michael was included in family outings and holidays. The mother even introduced him as her “future son-in-law.” He escorted her to her school dances. Michael had planned to go away to college that fall but because this young lady did not want him to leave town, he stayed home and attended a local community college. The relationship seemed to grow closer and closer.

Michael was somewhat immature for his age and had no previous sexual experience. The young lady told him of a previous sexual encounter she had with a former boyfriend. After they had dated for five months they became sexually active after discussing it and deciding there would be no sexual intercourse because they did not want to risk pregnancy. Their relationship consisted of touching and oral sex. They continued to date through the holidays that year and exchanged gifts. Her mother even gave Michael several gifts.

After almost a year of dating, for reasons unknown, this young lady called Michael one day in tears and told him that her parents were filing charges against him. It was at this point that Michael told his parents that this girl was not 16 as they had been told because he knew his parents would have been against the relationship if they had known her true age. He had no idea that he could get in the kind of legal trouble he was about to face since her parents had encouraged the relationship and it was completely consensual. After the charges were filed, Michael nor his parents were allowed to have any contact with this girl or her family. They had no idea why they filed the charges but suspect that her parents were angry with her about something and this was their way to punish her.

Life has been a nightmare since. It took a year for the case to work through the legal system. The girl continued to attempt to contact Michael but because he had been told he would go to jail if he had any contact with her, he did not reply to any of her attempts at contact. While the legal challenge he was facing was overwhelming, the saddest part of the situation at the time was Michael's broken heart. He truly believed that he loved this girl and that they would spend the rest of their lives together. He missed her and was severely depressed. He was treated for depression and even placed on a suicide watch for a short time.

The case did finally work its way through the system and Michael was charged with three counts of sexual assault of a child. In Texas the same charge or offense applies to rape. There is no differentiation made between this young man's offense and the violent forced rape of a 14 year old by a stranger because Texas law says that no one under 17 may consent. The exact same consequences are allowable and possible. For this reason, Michael had no choice but to accept a plea to avoid a possible 20 years in prison. He was given deferred adjudication with a seven year probation for three counts of sexual assault and will register as a violent sex offender for the REST OF HIS LIFE. The deferred adjudication is very misleading because even though the judge told him that successfully completing his probation would make it as if it never happened, that is not true. Under the current laws he will always be a registered sex offender and his record will always be available for anyone to see. His offense will never be differentiated on the registry from someone who forcibly and violently raped someone.

Michael was immediately forced to move from his home because of younger family members. He was forced to attend counseling groups with offenders who had committed violent, sick acts against very young children. He would be sick after hearing these stories. He is not allowed to attend church, or be any place where children gather. He was not even allowed to visit his parent's home unless the younger children were away. He has spent holidays alone because of the restrictions. He is required to take off work every 90 days to go to the police department to register. He is required to do it four times a year instead of once because of the three counts. Remember they dated almost a year so there was obviously more than just one incident. He must leave work twice a month to see his probation officer and until recently he was required to attend the weekly counseling. He has been released of that requirement. He must take annual polygraph exams to ensure he is in compliance with all the terms of his probation. Of course, all of these requirements come with an expensive financial burden.

The lifetime sex offender status is the biggest problem. Michael understands now that what happened was illegal even though she and her parents consented to the relationship. He has a lot of anger with himself for doing something so irresponsible even though he did not realize it at the time. But the lifetime consequences do not seem to fit the crime. For the rest of his life he will be reminded daily of his mistake no matter how sorry he may be or how unlikely he is to ever commit another offense. He does have a good job working in a warehouse now, but that came after being fired from another job because of the sex offender status and unable to find anyone who would hire him for almost a year. But he has no hope of a better job. His only hope is to do what he is doing now, work 70 - 80 hour weeks as hard as he can so that his employer sees what he can do. A change in Texas laws will soon post an offenders place of employment on the registry. His fear is that this will place the job he has been doing for almost five years in jeopardy. Michael would like to go back to college, something he had to give up because the stress of this whole situation made it impossible to focus. If he did go back, Texas law would require him to register with campus police as a sex offender for all to see. He would like to one day marry but worries about involving someone for whom he cares in this mess.

Did this young man commit a crime? Yes. Should he have been punished? Of course. However, should the consequences endure a lifetime and prevent him from being a more productive member of society? Should it be difficult for him to secure employment or find a place to live for the rest of his life? Or should this young man and many others in similar situations be allowed to come off the registry after a specified length of time? Would this not be a more effective use of resources? Is there a difference between a person who violently and forcibly rapes another person, a person who sexually violates a small child, and a young man who falls in love with a minor girlfriend? Does it make sense to expend the exact same resources for all these cases? Law enforcement is required to use the exact same time and lifetime effort toward monitoring offenders like Michael as they do monitoring the man who sexually abused four year olds or who violently raped a woman in a park. Does this makes sense? Should offenders who are not dangerous be required to register for the rest of their lives or could our resources be used more effectively to protect our children from the truly dangerous predators? Don't children deserve to have our focus be on protecting them from the predatory offenders who are actually the persons we should fear? Think about it.