After  posting about the impact of reducing anyone convicted of a crime to the status of permanent underclass,  New York Lawyer comes along with this story from Hudson, Kansas upping the ante.

Leroy Schad, 72, was convicted in March 2007 of aggravated indecent solicitation of a child. As part of his sentence, District Judge Ron Svaty ordered Schad to post the signs on his house and on his vehicle during his five years of probation and house arrest.

Hand-painted wooden signs reading “A Sex Offender Lives Here” are posted on all four sides of the his white house in this small central Kansas town of about 150 people. On his vehicle is a large decal with bold yellow lettering reading “Sex Offender In This Car.”

Fans of the Scarlet Letter are no doubt applauding this stroke of brilliance already.

Schad was originally charged with four counts of taking indecent liberties with a 9-year-old girl and an 11-year-old boy on March 24 and 25, 2005. As part of a plea agreement, the charges were dismissed and he pleaded guilty to the lesser count of solicitation.

With no prior convictions, Kansas sentencing guidelines for the offense range from probation to about three years in prison. Schad’s underlying sentence, if he violates probation, is 3 1/2 years.

While I don’t know exactly what “taking indecent liberties” means, I’m sure I wouldn’t like it.  In fact, I’m sure it would repulse me and anger me.  I hope that the kids are okay, and this won’t traumatize them for life, though my guess is that it will.

But as much as I am disgusted with offense such as this, the punishment of being publicly shamed by signs is another matter.

The loneliness and isolation imposed by the house arrest are the toughest to deal with, he said, adding that the signs on his car have sparked threatening gestures from other drivers that sometimes concern him.

You think?  So what was the empirical basis for the imposition of this shaming punishment?  What allowed the court to reject the punishments developed by law and impose conditions of his own making?

“I’m sure there is nothing specifically that says a court may sentence in this manner, but I think that the court has latitude in terms of the conditions it sets,” said Helen Pedigo, executive director of the Kansas Sentencing Commission. “I think the court has the ability to kind of be creative in what they consider restitution to the community.”

Restitution to the community?  I don’t think so.  This is tantamount to psychological torture.  Restitution to the community might well be served by 1000 hours of community service (that’s 25 weeks of full time community service for those of you without a calculator handy).  Not enough?  Give him more, but each judge in his imaginative little fiefdom should not be free to impose his personal vision of retributive justice outside the parameters of the law. 

What’s next, cutting off the hand that offends?