We need not discuss at any length the plaintiff's arguments with respect to the remainder of the factors Doe argues the examiner inappropriately considered. It suffices to point out that the plaintiff has acknowledged that: (i) he was an adult at the time he committed his predicate offenses and that his victims were five- and six year old children; (ii) he was adjudged a sexually dangerous person; and that (iii) he, at least during the earlier periods of his incarceration and civil commitment, engaged in antisocial behavior that subjected him to additional disciplinary action. We pause only briefly to comment on the plaintiff's assertion that he did not commit his offenses in a "public place" (factor 16). Although the offenses apparently took place in the living room of his then-girl friend, the record makes clear that the living room was a "place where detection is likely ... that is open to the scrutiny of others or where there is no expectation of privacy." 803 Code Mass. Regs. § 1.33 (16) (a). See Doe, Sex Offender Registry Bd. No. 10216 v. Sex Offender Registry Bd., 447 Mass. 779, 789 (2006).