I know someone on the registry and he absolutely deserves to be on it, however I think the whole thing is horseshit. There is a segment of the population that gets a false sense of security from the list — they think they know who to watch for — and there is a segment of the population that has no chance at a normal life because the list doesn't differentiate between a bona fide pedophile and some jerk who got caught taking a leak on a playground fence while drunk. It's just another decent idea POORLY executed. less

It really is such a good idea, but it really is so poorly implemented. The guy I know who's on the list (we went to high school together) is an extremely kind, considerate guy... and the parents of his 2-years-younger girlfriend didn't like his haircut, so on the day of his 18th birthday *bam* they called in statutory rape. The whole school was outraged, and the poor girlfriend didn't date anyone else the rest of high school, but he's still on the sex offender registry.

Way to ruin someone's chances of finding a decent job or housing despite them not having hurt anyone ever. less

This is VERY rare in the US. What are known as "Romeo and Juliette" laws usually prevent teen lovers, close in age from being convicted or charged with statutory rape. Virtually every US state has a form of "R&J" laws so that young men who date women a few years younger than themselves will not be charged with crimes.

Here's an interesting quote reguarding this issue:

Romeo and Juliet laws

Often, teenage couples engage in sexual conduct as part of an intimate relationship. This may start to occur before either participant has reached the age of consent, or after one has but the other has not. In some jurisdictions (such as California), if two minors have sex with each other, they would both be guilty of engaging in unlawful sex with the other person (misdemeanor instead of felony).[10][11] Most jurisdictions, as previously stated, consider the act itself to be prima facie evidence of guilt, as any consent between partners, even if freely given, does not meet the standard of law as it is given by a person the law has defined as being incapable of giving consent.

These aspects have often been considered unjust, leading to the passage of so-called Romeo and Juliet laws, which serve to reduce or eliminate the penalty of the crime in cases where the couple's age difference is minor and the sexual contact is only considered rape because of the lack of legally recognized consent. Such laws vary, but can include:

Rephrasing the definition of the offense itself to completely exclude situations where the difference in age is smaller than a specified amount of time.
Providing an affirmative defense to statutory rape based on the small difference in the participants' ages, or on evidence of a pre-existing sexual relationship between the accused and the perceived victim that did not constitute statutory rape.
Reducing the severity of the offense from a felony to a misdemeanor, which prevents loss of civil rights and reduces available penalties.
Reducing the penalty in such cases to a fine, probation, and/or community service
Eliminating the requirement that the convicted participant register as a sex offender, or reducing the duration of such registry from life to one or five years.
Allowing a convicted party to petition for expungement after serving any adjudged sentence.

Such laws generally apply to a couple whose ages differ by less than a specified number of years. They are, however, generally unavailable in any case where the older participant has an authoritative position over the younger regardless of relative age, such as a teacher/student, coach/player or guardian/ward relationship, or if any physical force was used or serious physical injury resulted. This is normally accomplished by making acts involving these circumstances separate crimes to which the "Romeo and Juliet" defense does not apply.

An example is Texas Penal Code, Section 22.011(e). It provides an affirmative defense to a charge of sexual assault if all of the following apply:

the accused was not more than 3 years older than the perceived victim
the perceived victim was older than 14 years of age at the time of the offense
the accused was not at the time registered or required to register for life as a sex offender
the conduct did not constitute incest
neither the accused nor perceived victim would commit bigamy by marrying the other (in other words, neither was married to a third person)

Some states are even more lenient than the Texas code in terms of the number of years between teen lovers. Even with the great rarity of teen lovers being convicted of statutory rape (and the number is VERY low in the US) most states do not even require any registry on the sex offender lists. less

This is very rare. Do you know for certain that the reason he was convicted of a sex crime was only due to the fact that the girl's parents "didn't like his hair?" It's pretty hard, in this day and age to get a conviction on statutory rape, especially if it's only a few years difference. In order to get a conviction, the girl would have most likely had to testify that he tricked her or raped her without consent. If one wasn't at the trial, (and one has to be convicted of a sex crime to be on the registry) one may not have full knowledge of what happened in that courtroom.

And, the way the registry works, not everyone on it is on it for life. less