Registered sex offender fired at CRF

[Awen]

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=117965&catid=339

Apparently this person worked for one of the vendors and was fired when someone brought it to the faire's attention.

But what got my attention was this: the faire representative (JP's lawyer) said they DON'T do background checks on the employees (including cast) because it only employs about 150 high school and college students for the summer (I know a LOT of people who work at faire who aren't either, and so do all of you).
But the other thing, and this made me laugh, was that the Colorado Bureau of Investigation does not require CRF to do background checks because it "deals with a broader age group" than just children.

What made me laugh about this is that the faire has gotten tamer and tamer every year so that they can attract more families (with their children). It's positively milquetoast except for the adult acts (washing well wenches, Iris & Rose, for example).

This raised my ire due to a situation that my daughter was involved in - she worked for a Subway store where the owner claimed he did background checks but really didn't. It became an issue when his assistant manager (who had a long criminal history, including violent crime) raped and nearly murdered a fellow employee - my daughter had gone to the store and found the beaten employee and helped police find the asst manager.

I'm appalled that with so many children at the grounds, and anything can happen, that the faire isn't doing background checks for the sketchiest of reasons.

[groomporter]

"According to the Douglas County Sheriff's Office, he did everything right when he moved, he registered and wasn't restricted from having access to children. That is why 9NEWS is choosing not to name the man or show his picture. The man's criminal record shows a 2001 conviction in Minnesota. His crime was punishable by one year in prison and a fine."

The video report said "prison OR a fine"

Wonder what the actual crime was.

Since the person was not employed by the fair, but by a vendor I wouldn't think it was CRF's responsibility to have done a background check.

[groomporter]

Of course the -really- honest answer would have been "we don't think it's cost effective to do background checks on a couple thousand participants, most of whom are unpaid, part-time volunteers"

[Bonny Pearl]

sex offender n. generic term for all persons convicted of crimes involving sex, including rape, molestation, sexual harassment and pornography production or distribution.

who says a sex offender might not be a teen or college student?  sex crimes are not limited to children being the victims, even though those types of predators have a special place in the universe (in my mind) and it ain't pretty.

it would be in the best interest of CRF or any other 'family venue' to do the CYA and run background checks.  unfortunately, it's just the way our world is... these types of crimes have been going on since we were created, we just hear about them now.

[Sitara]

You can also be a convicted sex offender for peeing outside.

[Awen]

Of course the -really- honest answer would have been "we don't think it's cost effective to do background checks on a couple thousand participants, most of whom are unpaid, part-time volunteers"

I think this gets to the heart of the issue - the cost of a CBI background check is about $40 (I've had to pay for them several times for some types of work I've done).  Multiply that by 1,000 volunteers and that gets into real money.

True, the person was employed by a vendor, but CRF's response was "we don't do background checks" on the CRF employees either. It's not CRF's responsibility to do them for vendors but as a matter of public safety perhaps that should be either a requirement to work for a vendor or that CRF adds it to the vendor charges and does it themselves. To take the risk that some child (or anyone else) could be hurt by someone who has a criminal history is to take a very big risk.

[Bonny Pearl]

coming from a bean counting background... it's an overhead expense and i'm sure could be budgeted in.

if a wal-mart can go through the expense of locking down a store when a child is missing, the faires can at least do a little thing such as a background check.

we practice due dilligence when it comes to our son while in the faire and camping there, same as any other time.  just because a faire might do background checks, we still wouldn't let our guard down around anyone.

[groomporter]

I don't know speaking as a crafter at MNRF, it seems a little overkill. Unless it's their first year at a fair, most crafters rarely just hire a stranger off the street the way a mainstream employers do, usually we approach a friend for help, or get a referrals from someone who already works at fair, someone who's already part of the fair community.

[Cobaltblu]

Ok, what is the big deal?

Personally I am more worried about being around drunk people with swords than about someone who probably groped someone's buttocks on a train.

Sex offender registries are an example of stupid politicians and over-reacting citizens putting something to law which doesn't address the real problem.  I have a list of people in the area who groped someone buttocks on a train but the murderer living next door who got paroled from prison is totally unaware to me, lol.

I know who in the neighborhood might want to fondle me if the lights go off yet I have no idea who just stole my new car (didn't actually happen).

Regards,

CB

[Bonny Pearl]

I don't know speaking as a crafter at MNRF, it seems a little overkill. Unless it's their first year at a fair, most crafters rarely just hire a stranger off the street the way a mainstream employers do, usually we approach a friend for help, or get a referrals from someone who already works at fair, someone who's already part of the fair community.

it is the the faire itself that i was referring, not necessarily the vendors.

and even though we all hope that references are a good way to go, we still have to be watchful.  just like i would probably watch the cash drawer with a newcomer if i had a shop; even though they were referred to me....of course my husband says i'm just mean, lol! 

[Tanda]

Of course the -really- honest answer would have been "we don't think it's cost effective to do background checks on a couple thousand participants, most of whom are unpaid, part-time volunteers"

I think this gets to the heart of the issue - the cost of a CBI background check is about $40 (I've had to pay for them several times for some types of work I've done).  Multiply that by 1,000 volunteers and that gets into real money.

As you pointed out, you paid the fee for several of your jobs. As have I. It doesn't have to be the company's responsibility to pay for those 1000 workers. You simply could include it in the contract for performers. Unfortunately, it takes a few weeks for it to be processed, and if you don't get your contract until June, you might not be cleared until Late July.

Also, since the staff (vendors and cast) at Faire don't have unsupervised contact with minors (or at least are not supposed to) it stands to reason that they needn't be background checked. The only people I might make an argument for are the trampoline guys, and anyone that works in the Children's Realm, but only because they have closer contact with kids. Maybe the Llama people. And even then, it's not supposed to be unsupervised contact. A parent should be right there, watching. And I think that's the difference in requiring background checks and not.

[groomporter]

I don't know speaking as a crafter at MNRF, it seems a little overkill. Unless it's their first year at a fair, most crafters rarely just hire a stranger off the street the way a mainstream employers do, usually we approach a friend for help, or get a referrals from someone who already works at fair, someone who's already part of the fair community.

it is the the faire itself that i was referring, not necessarily the vendors.

No, it was the post prior to yours that suggested putting in on the vendors, -or on a second reading at least passing the fee on to crafters. (Since I have a large staff to demonstrate our games that would add hundreds of dollars to my fees unless it was limited to people who work the entire run.)

-Heck there's a couple vendors I've known over the years who I'ld like to run a background check on, if you're going to require it, wouldn't it have to be universal?

[Bahlien]

What they haven't stated was if this fellow was/has been working at the Fair previously at all? If he has been, all of a sudden it has become a problem?

In the fairs case, I can see that doing background checks might turn up dirt, and suddenly find themselves understaffed in some area or another. The cost of doing so aside, their reluctance in that is understandable. Acceptable? Depends.

In 33 years, according to the article, there hasn't ever been a big problem. *knocks on wood* I've not heard any terrible horror stories yet myself and I'm glad for that. There is a factor that needs to be taken into account here. People at the Fair are armed.  Would it be stupid to try something around/near a crowd full of partially drunk, armed patrons and employees? That is obviously a rhetorical question. The answer is yes, it would be stupid.

Now back to the subject at hand, while I absolutely hate the type of behaviour that sex offenders are often linked to and guilty of, I don;t know what this fellow did. Just that he served time in jail already and paid a fine for it, eight years ago. What he actually did is anyones guess.

So he gets fired by fair. If CRF did background checks right now, how many other people would get fired for misconduct, felonies etc?  Quite a few, I'd imagine.

*steps off the box* Thats my two pence.

[Zoë]

In my opinion, the fault lies with the individual vendor for not doing a background check, not the faire.  The man was fired because the vendor realized his record, not because he'd done anything wrong.  In fact, he was the one who did everything right in getting a job.  He moved to Colorado, got on the registry, and went about doing what he could to get a job.  The fact that he did not have any restrictions about being around children says to me that his original offense probably had nothing to do with children, and like someone already said, you can become a sex offender for as little as urinating in public.  The sex offender registry is highly subjective.  I have a friend who was falsely accused of molestation, and even though the evidence proves otherwise, he was still slapped in the sex offender registry and it ruined his life.  So what I'm saying is, the offense could be little or it could be large, but we don't know that either way.  Oftentimes these problems arise from simple accusations rather than actual deeds.  

In the end I think it's being blown out of proportion.  There are a good lot of businesses that do not require background checks before hiring people, are we going to expose every single one of those businesses now?  As the attorney for the faire said, they haven't done background checks for 33 years and it's never been a problem.  I'm not defending the offender, but we don't know what he did in the first place so we can't really say he's a psychopath or a deranged sexual molester.  The faire shouldn't be taking any sort of fall for this, I think.  The fact is, yes there was an accused sex offender at the faire, yes he was fired, he's not there anymore so let's move on with our lives.  

That's my 2 cents, anyway.  I don't mean to offend or demean anyone, it's just my opinion on the subject, so keep that in mind.

[QueenTitania]

As an Human Resources professional I could go on and on .. but let's leave it at this....

Thank you Zoe ... you get two thumbs up from me !!!