Police warning: High-risk sex offender living in Vancouver

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      Vancouver police are warning the public that a "high-risk sex offender" is living in the city.

      The VPD put out the following news release about Michael Wayne Carpenter:

      The Vancouver Police Department believes that compelling circumstances exist to warn the public that a high-risk sex offender is now residing in Vancouver.

      Forty-four year old Michael Wayne Carpenter is a federal offender who has been released from custody after serving an eight year sentence for sexual assault with a weapon, forcible confinement, and threatening to cause death or bodily harm. It is believed he poses a risk of significant harm to the safety of female children, youth and adults.

      Carpenter has multiple sexual assault convictions, many of those included attacks on hotel employees. He is described as white, 5’9” tall, 180 lbs. with brown shaved hair and blue eyes.

      Subject to a long term supervision order, Carpenter is bound by the following conditions:

      • not to consume, purchase, or possess alcohol or drugs
      • not to own, use or possess a computer, or any device that would allow access to the internet
      • not to be in the presence of any female children under the age of 18
      • not to purchase, acquire, possess or access pornography or sexually explicit material
      • report all friendships, sexual relationships and intimate relationships with women

      Anyone witnessing Michael Carpenter in violation of any of these conditions is asked to contact 9-1-1 immediately.

      Comments

      2 Comments

      Crazy thought

      Aug 28, 2015 at 8:40pm

      Ok, just a crazy thought. How about not let people like this run around in public?

      0 0Rating: 0

      Wow...

      Aug 28, 2015 at 9:52pm

      Those conditions are ridiculous---we might as well bring back branding. Have these sorts of things been tried under the Charter? restricting access to pornography based on a judge's diktat can't be constitutional.

      0 0Rating: 0