The linked article is already taken down, but from the perspective of a woman, I will add a few thoughts. I attended a rural university that also shared a town with a state penitentiary. Periodically over my years there, the university would put notes in student mailboxes informing us "The state prison was releasing on parole convict X on [insert date]. X was tried and found guilty of 3 counts rape. X stalks women and was armed during each of the events for which he was convicted. Psychologist have stated that X has near 100% likelihood of reoffending. If you are female do not walk alone. At night, do not walk without campus security or in small groups." The times we got a note like this, some weeks or a few months would pass, X would reoffend, raping some woman who normally did not have the benefit of campus security escorts, and we would get another note in the mailbox telling us that the security recommendation was no longer in effect. The town police were hard men.
Last year in college, a neighbor came to my door freaked out because somebody was peeping on her. Called the local police.
Police officers came to our door told us that peeping toms and flashers had statistical likelihood of escalating their behavior to more and more extreme acts including rape. They already knew the guy based on the neighbor's description. Also said not to fuck around if we saw him again. Any indication of a fixation was a really bad sign.
So should submitter be subject to legal scrutiny, monitoring, and restraint on behavior after that single event? Absolutely. Bad behavior for some, begets worse behavior later. Should submitter be subject to scrutiny, monitoring, and restraint decades after a single offense? Probably not.
We have sexual predator laws for a damn good reason: some people are guaranteed to violently reoffend unless prevented from doing so. Use of those same laws to ensnare teenagers who sext, Romeo & Juliet lovers, and the legitimate one-time offenders, is outside the original law's intent. The issue for the last category of offender is having a legal path to redemption. This piece seems to be missing. Arguable that for a lot of ex-convicts, a path to redemption and unrestrained participation in society is missing.