Police: Man waving junk on an Orange Line platform flagged as unregistered serial sex offender


Transit Police report arresting a man who was flaunting what he had early this morning on a platform at Back Bay station - and then charging him for failing to register as a Level 3 sex offender.

Police report officers went down to the platform around 12:30 a.m. on a report of "a man exposing himself and committing a lewd act."

Daniel Williams, 55, matched the description they'd gotten:

The male provided the officers with several false names and social security numbers. Ultimately officers were able to ascertain the man's true identity and it became obvious to the officers why he was attempting to mislead them.

According to the state Sexual Offender Registry Board, Williams was convicted of rape in 1978 and indecent assault on a minor in 1993. Since then, he's racked up several convictions for open and gross lewd and lascivious behavior.

Innocent, etc.



Free tagging: 


And this is why...

By on

...while it may be fun to crack jokes about public meat beating, actually these freaks are potentially dangerous. So confronting them may not be that wise but reporting them and getting their pictures (preferably from the waist up) is important.


Actually, preferably a shot

By on

Actually, preferably a shot that includes the face (for identification purposes) and "waist down" (for evidentiary value).

It's refreshing to hear a guy

By on

It's refreshing to hear a guy say this is serious and disturbing behavior instead of minimizing with a wisecrack.


Oh don't worry..

By on

...I'll be sure to let you down with some insensitive, juvenile joke of questionable humor. It's what I do.


So he's been some sort of

By on

So he's been some sort of sexual offender since 1978 (probably longer since that was his conviction date). Is there a point where it's determined someone can not be rehabilitated? It's obviously a history of offenses longer than 36 years. Would he have been a good candidate for the old state hospitals?


Good candidate?

By on

He's the f'n poster boy for the old state hospitals!


He's a good candidate for a

By on

He's a good candidate for a plot in a cemetery.

I believe sex offenders, such as this one can't, be rehabilitated. The guy is wired a certain way and this is what does it for him. You can't change that, hospitalization won't change that either. Plus, this guy clearly doesn't want to change. He's failed to comply with the law and register as a sex offender. That only leads me to believe he is still up to his old tricks. Imagine all the stuff he's probably gotten away with as well.


Just b/c you neuter someone

By on

Just b/c you neuter someone does not mean they can't sexuually assault a victim with other objects.


By on

Yes, a person can be declared a "sexually dangerous person" and be locked up indefinitely. I'm not sure what the exact criteria is for this and why it wasn't applied to him, though.


Seems like he would be a good

By on

Seems like he would be a good candidate for Bridgewater's treatment center for sexually dangerous persons. It seems to be a compulsion with this guy that he can't control. Not that I'm sympathetic, but it sounds less intentionally malicious than an impulse control disorder. I also wonder if there's a brain injury or a factor of cognitive impairment involved.


He also should be in prison

By on

He also should be in prison for rape, and in my opinion, sentencing for that crime should be much longer. I'm often shocked at how little time offenders get for the rape of a child. 20 years should be the minimum. The travesty is that coke dealers get longer sentences than those who penetrate and irreparably injure little children. That crime can destroy a kid's body AND soul.


I've said it before...

By on

Anyone convicted of a sexaul crime should never breath free air again. Period. No parole. There should be special prisons specifically for them. Also, sexual crimes should be prosecuted at the federal level. Given the high rate of recidivism, I don't see how a normal, sane individual could disagree.

Really? Someone jerking off

By on

Really? Someone jerking off in public should be treated more harshly than someone who actually inflicts physical harm on someone (stabbing, shooting, etc.)?

If he's capable of that..

By on

...then what else his he capable of? Maybe my post went over your head, but I said that if someone is convicted of SEXUAL ASSAULT then they should never breath free air again. He committed sexual assault years ago. He should be locked up for life and should not have free enough to crank one out in public. End of discussion.

I can read.

First you said

Anyone convicted of a sexaul crime should never breath free air again. Period.

And then, when you were called out on it, you said:

Maybe my post went over your head, but I said that if someone is convicted of SEXUAL ASSAULT then they should never breath free air again.

So which is it, "Sexual crime", which includes, for example, drunkenly pissing on a tree where someone happens to see you? or "Sexual Assault", which is what you said while backtracking?.

And, while you're at it, which clause of the Constitution, specifically, would you think gives the Federal government jurisdiction?

So you would have the feds

By on

So you would have the feds spend the money and time with a chronic masturbator instead of the perfectly capable local law enforcement who are funded and trained to handle exactly these things? Sounds like a great use of resources, since the FBI doesn't have anything else to do like say, handle terrorism, drug rings, human trafficking, serial rapists and murderers, kidnappings and homicides that cross state borders, bank fraud, gangs, gun trafficking, organized crime, Ponzi schemes, uh...what am I forgetting here?

You do know that states have laws at or on par with the feds to deal with nearly every crime, right? States have these things called criminal justice systems. You can't just pick up the phone and call Agent Mulder when some guy jerks off on your front lawn.

Maybe I wasn't clear...

By on

You are the second person to misread my original post. I thought I was pretty clear, and that my post would be easily comprehended. Anyway, I said that if someone is convicted of SEXUAL ASSAULT, then they should never breath free air again. He was convicted of SEXUAL ASSAULT years ago. Fill in the blanks *sheesh*

Why didn't they charge him

By on

Why didn't they charge him with the current reported crime, instead of just the bureaucratic technicality of failing to register?