Sex Offender in Memphis Arrested for Bringing School Lunch to His Daughter

This is an interesting story I came across earlier that really brings up some valid points about our sex offender registries. As often as I write about sex offenders and call them names there is some disparity that we really need to clear up and an extremely large group of people that are on registries that shouldn’t be. As Americans our view of sex is tempered by our religion and although you see sex on TV and in the movies constantly for the large part our country is a nation of prudes.

Do we really need to put kids on the registries that send sexually graphic pictures to each other via cell phone? I’m not saying what they are doing shouldn’t be frowned on or illegal, all I am saying is that they shouldn’t have to register as sex offenders and have the stigma that goes along with it. Or how about the 18-20 year old guy that sleeps with his 16-17 year old girlfriend? Shit, charge them with statutory rape and be done with it. Unless they have a history of sleeping with minors there’s no reason to fuck them up for life just because they made a mistake. Repeat or violent sex offenders can’t be “cured”. It’s as simple as that and short of frying them there is no cure but I do think that there needs to be some kind of line or behavior that “qualifies” them. I’m not sure what it is and I don’t hold enough trust in a lot of our judges to make that decision either.

I am almost 43 years old and if I though that someone older than my girls was wanting to have sex with them (my oldest daughter is in Junior High now) I guess I would just have to beat the fuck out of them just to make sure they didn’t come back. Forget the police. There’s nothing they can do that will scare a perv more than me. That having been said I can remember being 18. I would sleep with anything that had a pulse and I don’t recall checking ID either. Now I see that as pretty stupid behavior, bordering on illegal at times but I don’t consider myself a sex offender because of it. That brings us to the reason behind this post in the first place.

Daniel Hugh Wax of Tennessee…

danielwax

32-year-old Daniel Hugh Wax is a registered sex offender who brought his daughter’s lunch to to her Elementary School. Unfortunately for him a supposed routine check of visitor’s names (I think this is horseshit, someone that knew Daniel most likely reported him) against the sex offender registry flagged him. In addition to being a convicted offender he lives in one place and is registered in another. That’s a big no-no for an RSO.

There aren’t a lot of facts about what happened coming out right now. I’ve seen comments and rumors to the effect that he was just dropping her lunch off at the school and others that he was going to have lunch with her. Either way it’s breaking the law.

Should Wax be on the registry at all? He was convicted in 1997 for a Statutory Rape charge which would have made him around 20 when convicted, so he was probably 19 or 20 when he was charged. I don’t know for sure how old the girl was. I’ve seen comments to the effect of her being 17 and him 19 but then I’ve seen a couple that say she was 14. His entry on the Tennessee Registry doesn’t specify her age or anything else about the crime.

If she was 17 and he 19, then I would have to say he probably doesn’t belong on the registry. But 14? Yeah, most definitely. There’s only three years between 14 and 17 but a decade of maturity squeezed into those three years, depending on the child.

So does Wax need to be on the registry?

I probably wouldn’t have posted his mug shot if not for a few other items that I’ll list below. In addition to Statutory Rape Wax has also been convicted of other crimes as well listed in order of newest to oldest including,

  • Possession of Drug Paraphernalia
  • Theft of Property
  • Convicted Felon in Possession of a Handgun
  • Theft of Property
  • Burglary
  • Aggravated Burglary
  • Aggravated Burglary
  • Statutory Rape
  • Burglary
  • Burglary
  • Burglary

His most recent arrest is the drug paraphernalia charge, which was in 2005. All in all not someone I would particularly want as a neighbor but just because he’s a piece of shit does that make him a child molester who needs to be on the registry or just a serious dumbass. Some people might make the argument that the fact that he’s an RSO might have “kept him down” and attributed to his criminal activity. I’m not one of those but I am interested in hearing your argument if you think that’s the case.

It’s also rumored that he has used the same address to register several times while living somewhere else, so if true it’s not his first time to lie to his parole officer about his whereabouts.

The last group of questions I have about this is was the Statutory Rape he was convicted of consensual or not? That would make a big difference in my book if the girl really was 17. Were the parents aware of it? Was this a relationship that lasted a while or did he just sleep with a minor because he could and then bolt? All of those are serious questions that should be asked by the judge before putting someone on the registry.

I am all for just flat out killing pedophiles but not everyone that is a convicted sexual offender is a pedophile.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Comments |9|

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Richard, I understand completely what you are saying. This is why collective incapacitation doesn’t work; an “all or nothing” attitude is a pretty wide net to cast. A lot of “not-so-guilty” people get tagged in an effort to catch the “very guilty” people.
    BUT…here is the problem. If we don’t want “all or nothing,” but don’t trust others to make the right choice regarding being selective (officers, judges, etc.), then where does that leave us? I’m not saying I don’t agree with you—it’s the flip side of the coin. Once we give people power to be selective, an entire new set of issues pop up regarding control, abuse of power, politics, and so on.
    It’s a tough question to address…..and one of the reasons there are so many theories surrounding criminal justice policy and why research is constantly taking place to better evaluate efficacy of what we currently know. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be a perfect solution. Seems like one of those “one half dozen to the other” situations.
    I don’t know enough about the reasons he was arrested in the first place, but ultimately, I guess the fact is that he IS an RSO and should know his limitations. If he shouldn’t have been at the school, then technically, he has no one to blame but himself. If he wasn’t aware of the specifics of being an RSO, I bet he knows them now. 😉

    Reply

  • My first thought is that I don’t want him around my kids. But that has more to do with his other crimes.
    I agree that we do need more information about his statutory rape conviction in order to form a solid opinion. Now, I do agree that sex between a 14 year old and a possible 17, 18, 19 year old is inappropriate. Should it follow him for the rest of his life? I’m not so sure about that. It’s not as if he was a 40 year old man having sex with a 12 year old.
    But then I’m also a bit, concerned, to say the least, about his lying to his parole officer. He registered under a different address, one at which he was NOT living. He knows that a condition of release is that RSOs need to register every year with their current address and notify police if/when they move. Yet he chose to lie. What is he hiding?
    I am in NO way defending a RSO. Instead, I feel sorry for his daughter. She can’t have her father deliver lunch to her at school or take her to lunch. Her father can’t attend choral concerts or band concerts or school plays to see her. Her father can’t attend the class play or holiday parties. That’s painful for his daughter.

    Reply

  • Overall I guess my opinion on judges along with others involved in politics is just a not entirely irrational fear of government that has nothing to do with this at all. I would have to say that a fair share of judges and those in elected positions that are involved in any type of law enforcement do a good job. It’s the few that don’t that scare me.
    I do think that as an RSO, particularly one that has been classified as one for ten years, he should have known better and most likely did but just didn’t care enough to follow the law.

    Reply

  • That’s got to be the hardest part of it, how it effects his family. I do think that if he cared enough about his family that he would have followed the law in the first place. Judging from the fact that he’s been arrested several times since he was placed on the registry he doesn’t. His last conviction was in 2005 and if his daughter is in elementary school that means she was born prior to ’05.

    Reply

  • Daniel Wax is a close friend of mine. We talk daily. He never rapped anyone from his past. It was all a lie. I can promise you this. He lives where he is registered at. He is not a bad person. He means well. My name is Wendy and we have been friends for over a year now. I can tell you that kids are in no danger when it comes to him.

    Reply

  • Wendy, do you understand the term “statutory rape”? That means he had sex with someone legally too young to give consent. Even if this girl said yes, she was legally too young to GIVE consent. As Richard pointed out, this could be a girl that was 16 or 17, OR it could be a 12 or 14 year old. It all depends on the law of the state.
    And technically it doesn’t matter if you believe that kids are in no danger when it comes to this RSO. The fact remains that he IS a RSO and isn’t allowed near schools. He is aware of this and chose to ignore the law yet again. It seems he has a problem with adhering to the letter of the law.

    Reply

  • I found some information regarding Wax’s crime. http://www.wreg.com/wreg-daniel-wax,0,5137613.story
    If this nanny is to be believed, when Wax was 19 he had sex with his 15 year old girlfriend. I don’t know too many 19 year old boys that date 15 year old girls.
    Also, I found another article that states Wax was not on an approved list of people able to visit his daughter at the school (a form that parents fill out every year). http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/oct/20/bartlett-man-arrested-violating-sex-offender-restr/ The girl’s mother called the school and gave a verbal approval for Wax to bring the girl lunch that day. That tells me that she felt the need to monitor his time with his daughter. Which then, of course, leads to many more questions as to why.

    Reply

  • I am his Ex Relative. Yes, the girl was 15 and he was 19. I have heard different versions of the story over the years so i am not sure which one is absolutely true. When all said and done, she was bragging to her friends about something that didn’t happen, BUT her mom found out and informed officials. He was also in trouble on a different charge and to get a plea bargin, he had to plea guilty. He served a short stint in jail. He may of been wronged on this BUT he is still an asshole who is guilty of multiple other crimes. The bastard had many opprotunities to get a job, and do well for himself. He failed to show up for work, and decided that he could do better buglaizing people, seeling drugs, and simply being a criminal!

    Reply

  • I appreciate you keeping us abreast of this. Pretty much everything you’ve said is the picture I have gotten. Even with this I don’t think he’s been completely wronged. His intentions may have been all fine and dandy but having been on the registry for several years now there’s no way he can’t know he’s not allowed to go into a school.

    Reply

Legend *) Required fields are marked
**) You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Category: Site News