Bill would toughen child enticement law
Some lawmakers want to quickly fix Ohio’s child enticement law after charges were dropped against a convicted sex offender in Worthington who recently tried to lure girls into his car.
But even without a change in law, Jonathan Ringel, 25, of Virginia, wasn’t off the hook for long.
Like his 2015 convictions in Virginia, which related to touching himself and exposing himself to preteen girls, Ringel was indicted last week on five charges related to his efforts between late July and early August to have sex with four young girls, ranging in age
from 9 to 11. Ringel moved to Worthington after being released early on parole.
Ringel was arrested on Aug. 14 in Worthington after he approached two girls on East North Street. But the child enticement charge was quickly tossed out in Franklin County Municipal Court because the Ohio Supreme Court in 2014 invalidated part of Ohio’s child enticement law.
That prompted angry parents to contact officials including Rep. Mike Duffey, R-Worthington, who is now working on legislation to tighten up the law.
“While we can all agree that normal, innocent behavior should not be criminalized, it is not at all normal for a stranger to approach fourth-graders and coax them to enter his vehicle,” Duffey said.
Worthington resident Andy Sears said on a Facebook post that he walked outside his house and saw Ringel talking to a young girl who was walking her dog. He said he recognized Ringel’s vehicle from community social media posts as a man who had been approaching young girls and trying to get them into his car.
Sears said he yelled to the girl to get away from him, and Ringel drove off. Sears got the license plate and gave a report to a detective who told him they had other statements from children who had been approached.
Ringel was arrested late that evening.
Though the initial child enticement charge was dropped, a grand jury late last week indicted Ringel under a different portion of the child enticement statute, plus a trio of felony charges, including seconddegree importuning — a
heightened penalty based on Ringel’s previous offenses.
Ringel also was indicted on two fourth-degree felony counts of disseminating matter harmful to juveniles.
To be charged under child enticement, prosecutors have to show the person intended to engage in unlawful sexual activity when asking the young person to get into a vehicle, said Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O’Brien. Generally, that can be difficult unless the alleged perpetrator admits to his motives, he said, and Worthington police initially didn’t think they had enough to charge Ringel under that section of the law.
However, Columbus police also had cases involving Ringel, where he was actually exposing himself and masturbating in front of young girls. Those allegations supported the three felony charges and two indictments for child enticement.
“With his background and record, as well as the other course of conduct, it’s clear what he was doing when he was soliciting the Worthington girls,” O’Brien said. “There was enough there to infer that he wasn’t just trying to give them a ride so they could save some footsteps on their Fitbit.”
Duffey is working with Rep. Bob Cupp, R-Lima, a former Supreme Court justice, to clarify Ohio’s child enticement law by applying it to strangers without a legitimate relationship to a child and with a history of sex offenses.
Ohio’s previous law made it a crime, regardless of intent, for someone to ask a child younger than 14 to accompany them into a vehicle or building without a parent’s consent.
In a 5-2 ruling, the Ohio Supreme Court in
2014 partially invalidated the law, saying it was too broad, converting innocent situations and constitutionally protected activity into crimes. The majority noted that the law could make it a crime for a coach to drive a youth home to pick up a piece of forgotten equipment.
Cupp was not on the court at the time.
Duffey said he is trying to craft the bill in a way that will meet the court’s approval, applying it to a pattern of behavior.
“In the totality of elements, we could all agree no innocent person would do all of those things,” he said.
“You don’t know these kids; you don’t have any reason to solicit third- and fourth-grade girls; you have a prior record. Everyone can connect the dots and say this is not right.”
Duffey has worked with O’Brien on the bill, and the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association is reviewing it, O’Brien said.
“The public wants to see people like this effectively prosecuted to the fullest extent the law would allow,” O’Brien said.
Meanwhile, a bipartisan pair of lawmakers has re-introduced a bill requiring a mandatory prison sentence for someone convicted of importuning — the solicitation of minors for sex, often through online contact.
The bill passed the House unanimously last session but stalled in the Senate. Sponsored by Reps. Tim Schaffer, R-Lancaster, and Kent Smith, D-Euclid, it would impose an unspecified mandatory prison term for a first offense involving a victim younger than 13, or a repeat offense involving someone age 13 to 17, if the offender is more than 10 years older than the victim.