Rethinking Sex Offender Registration and Residency Legislation

By TChris, Section Crime Policy
Posted on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 01:49:48 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This:

Sex offender registration laws provide the illusion of safety while satisfying society's unfortunate urge to continue punishing offenders who have already paid their debt to society, but growing evidence suggests that the laws are actually counterproductive.

Laws requiring widespread public notification of past crimes and restricting where such sex offenders can live have not been shown to reduce the number of new sex crimes, the report says, but rather shun former sex offenders and may be driving them underground.

A new report by Human Rights Watch examines registration laws and their legislative cousins, residency restriction laws. From an HRW summary:

In many states, registration covers everyone convicted of a sexual crime, which can range from child rape to consensual teenage sex, and regardless of their potential future threat to children. Unfettered public access to online sex-offender registries with no “need-to-know” restrictions exposes former offenders to the risk that individuals will act on this information in irresponsible and even unlawful ways. There is little evidence that this form of community notification prevents sexual violence. Residency restrictions banish former offenders from entire towns and cities, forcing them to live far from homes, families, jobs and treatment, and hindering law-enforcement supervision. Residency restrictions are counterproductive to public safety and harmful to former offenders.

Far be it from most politicians to base policy on facts and evidence rather than false stereotypes and the political advantage of appearing "tough on crime," but those who think laws should be based on reason and good sense should give this valuable HRW report serious consideration.

< Dodd and Obama: Contrast on Iraq | Bush's Iraq Speech: Open Thread >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Rethinking Sex Offender Registration and Residency Legislation | 17 comments (17 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

One of the oddest things I've seen recently (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by phat on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 04:12:12 PM EST

Was a debate between the county prosecutor in Omaha and the Legal Director of the ACLU Nebraska. I say debate because it turned out not to be a debate. It was concerning residency restrictions. Both sides ended up being in complete agreement.

Prosecutors and law enforcement, along with organizations like the ACLU think the residency restrictions are bad policy.

Residency restrictions, at least, should be done away with.

phat

interesting views and comments (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by kiokwus on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 04:48:52 PM EST

From one who has lived with this subject for over 20 years, the comments today are no different than yesteryear. The difference being the interaction of the media and the hype surrounding sex offenders.

What offenses that have become commonplace in today's world didn't exist as a crime 20 years ago. That and should someone touch another inappropriately, IE, touched a butt or breast as a challenge in school, a slap on the face normally took care of the problem. Today, send your kids to jail, put them on a registry, deny them any form or type of future. Spread their name from one end of the country to the other. We lost something somewhere...........

You talk about the recidivism rates being so "high" when it comes to sex offenders. The DOJ published that there is a 5.5% +- of rearrest with a 3.2% +- of re-conviction for a NEW sex crime. The figures you read from so many other sources the quote any figure from 10 to 90% do nothing but create abject fear in the population, a population that would believe what the media states, and these statements come from your elected officials who know where to find a gravy trail to re-election.

One comment states that 1 in 10 is to many when it comes to sex offenses. What happened to 7 in 10 that commit drug dealing, assault, battery, theft, and oh so many other crimes? These people live next door to as well as a sex offender. Maybe you have forgotten that the vast majority of sex crimes happen within the home or by someone the victim knows. Stranger danger is in fact a rare occurrence.

Unfortunately, sex crimes have been with us since before time forgotten. These offenses will be with us until the judgment day. Educating your family is your responsibility, not some official looking for votes. The destruction of the American view of forgiveness for offenses committed and paid for per the legal system, terrifies me. Once a person, juvenile or adult, has completed the term of punishment as set forth by a court of law, they, like yourself, deserve the right to build a lawful lifetime with a chance to prove themselves. To continue punishing not only the offender, but their families as well, is abhorrent in a democratic world. This world that claims to protect the children, is the very same that harms the children, "All in the name of the CHILDREN!!"

visit: www.roarforfreedom.com to learn more on the prevention of sexual abuse.

interesting findings (4.00 / 1) (#4)
by ksh on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 03:43:10 PM EST

I find the recent tendency to change the punishment of offenders after they have served their time or during their incarceration offensive and questionably constitutional (ex post facto) and a product of sensational media.

It used to be that such offenders were local news and didn't take up space on national media. It's not that it's not a heinous crime, it's that the reaction is out of proportion to the threat.

How (3.00 / 1) (#6)
by Wile ECoyote on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 04:00:53 PM EST

about repeat offenders?

: if the offense involves (none / 0) (#16)
by narius on Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 11:58:41 AM EST

violence, then I hope 3-strike laws will kick in and they won't be let out again.
If so, registration is moot.

[ Parent ]

The report is ... (1.00 / 1) (#1)
by narius on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 03:05:11 PM EST

misleading. It states that the most comprehensive studies shows a 14% re-offend rate. It has not addressed the issue of whether this is under the system of sex offender registration. May be the rate is low because the sex offenders registered and are worried about getting caught.

Furthermore, the public should not be facing even a 14% re-offend rate. That means that more than one out of ten of these criminals will do something horrible again in the future.

We should look at registration as part of their debt to society. The really bad offenders should be grateful that they are allowed back into society at all.

I do agree that the different kind of offense should be dealt with different and there is no point in punishing consensual sex between teenagers. However, we should not lose sight of the real sexual predators.

Hey narius, long time no offend, (3.00 / 1) (#2)
by Jlvngstn on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 03:17:47 PM EST

What sex offenses by your estimation should be classifed as predatory?

Methinks that none should be posted online and if society is so desperate for these postings they should only be offenders who used force or violence.

[ Parent ]

In my non-professional opinion .... (1.00 / 1) (#3)
by narius on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 03:38:29 PM EST

all sex offenses involve

violence
threats of physical or other harms (you don't do this and I will show your pictures on the internet)
use of drugs unknown to the victims
involve minors when the offender is much older (we can debate what that means, and I would say a cut-off point of 25 sounds reasonable)

should be classified as predatory.

Furthermore, I am not adamant on posting ALL the relevant information online. However, these people need to register so the authority and relevant parties (like schools) know where they are.

Once again, they should be glad that they are allowed back into society. If it is up to me, I don't want any of them in my neighborhood and I am sure I am not the only one thinking that way.

should be classified as predatory.

[ Parent ]

I'm guessing you (2.00 / 1) (#5)
by ksh on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 03:45:39 PM EST

mean "all sex offenses THAT involve"

changes the meaning of your qualifiers considerably...

[ Parent ]

: yes, ... (none / 0) (#14)
by narius on Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 11:52:19 AM EST

you are correct .. i was typing fast ...

[ Parent ]

Sex offenses and Registration (3.00 / 1) (#8)
by womanwarrior on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 04:17:25 PM EST

I'm curious what people think about the child pornography laws which punish looking at pictures on the internet and require 15 years registration after serving hefty sentences.
Self disclosure: It seems way over the top to me.

[ Parent ]

: Child pornography is ... (none / 0) (#15)
by narius on Fri Sep 14, 2007 at 11:57:26 AM EST

very different from sex crime with a direct victim, IMHO.
While the child in the picture is a victim, the penetrator is the person who takes the picture. The people watching on the internet are only spectators.
However, having said that, I think it still make sense to have them register. There is no harm and some benefits in keeping track of them. At the least, it will also serve as a reminder (to them) that they are watched and they better not move from watching to acting.

[ Parent ]

The DOJ study was '94 or '95 (none / 0) (#12)
by 1980Ford on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 06:08:32 PM EST

Before there were public registries.

Also, equally as plausible is the opposite, the possibility that there is nothing to lose and no reason not to offend.

And the 14% rate need not be a horrible crime. What % of that 14% is? That's a good question and maybe the HRW report answers it.

[ Parent ]

Welcome Back TChris (none / 0) (#9)
by Jeralyn on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 04:31:07 PM EST

Great to have you back. You were missed.

: I concur (none / 0) (#10)
by Jlvngstn on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 04:45:29 PM EST

Altho i do not post much to your postings I love them and look forward to them. Your posts serve as talking points with my PAC group and i am appreciative. My wife loves your postings and wishes i were more like you but she is a sucker for progressive mindsets.............

[ Parent ]

define the terms (none / 0) (#13)
by diogenes on Thu Sep 13, 2007 at 07:38:34 PM EST

True pedophiles (who have sexual activity with prepubertal children) are notoriously hard to treat. It's like changing someone's sexual orientation. Any repeat offender who is a pedophile or any single offender with severe sadism (beating, rape/murder, etc) needs to be locked up for 20-40 years or longer.
As someone who actually attempts to treat pedophiles, I am always surprised by how many try to live near schools or get "girlfriends" with young kids soon after release. At least as far as pedophiles go, we need to fix the laws rather than toss them out.
That said, the field regards attraction to pubescent teenagers (13-17) as not deviant; such "hebephiles" are much more likely to be also attracted to adults and need less draconian laws.

fix this (none / 0) (#17)
by ihavekids2 on Mon Oct 08, 2007 at 07:28:04 PM EST

Im registered never denied it I pinched a nipple 100% true I plead guilty acually I didnt even think it was an issue to be honest. I was sentence and found out it was an issue but it was to lte to fight it and try to lie about what I hd done I had already said yeah I did that big deal.
I completed my probation I went through therapy MAN DID I learn alot in thereapy as a misdemeaner offender I heard stuff I never even wanted to know. You people use the wrong words when you say things like pervert or scum, but im not here to bash so on with the story I was convicted in Colorado I was a model client in therapy and probation and was released early THAT DOES NOT HAPPEN IF YOUR A PREDATOR. I moved to Wyoming there is a huge job market here I found a good job got married had 2 more kids and Wyoming out f the blue changed some of the laws. I have kids so I do think there is a need for sex offender registry the childrn need protected I personnaly tell mine what can happen to them as I have been in the room with some rally really bad guys but that is also another story. When wyoming changed the law I went from a guy who was near done registering and considered low risk to a lifetime registrant and now the general public can tell the difference from my low risk offence and the man up the road who had sex with 2 little boys in his hot tub you folks should be conserned about this you cant go online in my state and find out who is bad and whether yo believe it or not there is good and bad offenders and be very careful I found out the hard way anyone can get on that list anyone. Now I am gonna leave this on a not that will shock everyone dont worry about me or the 600,000 offenders on registries we have all had our DNA taken and if we havent killed ourselves are just happy making it home everyday to spend some time with what little family and or friends we have. Worry about the non compliant offender you dont see at the address listed on the net or the GUYS who havent been caught yet because you wont see them with your kids the do not look evil the are not wearing a shirt that reads SEX OFFENDER I tell you will never see them coming deviance is the mother of all evil