a public defender

http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/news/press210.htm

We will post criminal conviction information online, taking care, however, to post the information in a form that will reduce the risk of identity theft.

Will those seeking this be asked to provide information of their own, so the state can keep track of who is looking for what, in the event someone decides to take the law into their own hands?

Also, it’s been almost a year since that press release. I know docket information is now available, but am I missing where conviction information is available?

PS: I understand these things take time, I’m just wondering if it is going to become a reality…

Will those seeking this be asked to provide information of their own, so the state can keep track of who is looking for what, in the event someone decides to take the law into their own hands?

That’s never been a concern of the legislature, and law enforcement concern is spotty at best. (I once attempted to report an online commenter who’d posted, “If you’re looking to kill someone just for fun, look at the sex offender registry.” I say attempted, because law enforcement declined to even take a report, saying the prosecutor had advised them not to take any such reports regarding sex offenders.)

I’m still waiting for someone to explain to me how a database of persons and current addresses is a barrier to those truly dangerous offenders who are intent on finding another victim, whether the database is for murderers, gun crimes, sex offenders, drunk drivers, or nose-pickers. I’m told it’s to “keep an eye on” offenders. But since most recidivism happens during probation/parole, I’m a bit fuzzy on why folks think putting ex-offenders on a form of “civil” probation is a positive step.

As far as record keeping goes, though, I’ve been wondering about the national registry in the context of the privacy act. Is it true that any Federal data collection agency must keep records of to whom information about an individual is disclosed, and provide that record to the individual at the person’s request?

I’m not one for registries, but doesn’t a murder registry make more sense than a blanket sex offender registry? Even assuming that pedophiles are horrible recidivists, the sex offender registries are way more broad than “mere” pedophilia (and homicide recidivism is lower than rape, I believe). Murder, on the other hand, (arguably) means that you represent a very significant danger to the community, particularly if it is first or second degree.

And that being said, why are there no drug registries? Drug users have the highest recidivism rates, they can clearly be a danger to the community and many of our drug laws are even more strict than sex offense laws?

All of which just goes to show that the people backing the registries were never concerned with public safety, only nurturing public stigmas.

I’m not one for registries, but doesn’t a murder registry make more sense than a blanket sex offender registry?

It’s been established that sex offenders, as a group, have a far lower recid rate than other types of ex-cons. The only group with a lower rate than sex offenders? Murderers! Strange, isn’t it?

And that being said, why are there no drug registries?

Because it would be too large and cost too much money. A small percentage of released inmates are sex offenders, and that registry system is already straining at its limits of feasibility. How many drug offenders are released every year?

A murderer’s registry in Connecticut would be useless. Murderer’s don’t get parole here and the max sentence is 60 years. You could have the odd case where the defendant gets 25 (the min) and gets out by the time he’s in his late 40s, early 50s, but I don’t think you’d see too many.

How do you distinguish between those convicted of murder and those who plead down to manslaughter?

How do you distinguish between those convicted of murder and those who plead down to manslaughter?

Therein lies the growth potential, and one of the reasons the sex offender registry is so large. After all, the Cheshire killers wouldn’t have “qualified” for either registry. (Though how knowing their home addresses would have made a difference, I can’t say.)

For some time now, concerning the SOR, some defendants are permitted to plead guilty to non-sex crimes in order to avoid the collateral consequences of registration. “Child molestation” becomes “child abuse”–a non-SOR offense. Twice since the first of the year, a law enforcement officer in my home state has received such a deal.

Otoh, the AWA includes provisions for a national child abuse registry which will include substantied cases rather than only convictions. Currently it’s for government agencies only, but we’ve heard that song before.

Wisconsin’s CCAP provides charge and disposition data for all crimes for free and has for several years.

Utah provides charges, disposition and the entire docket for for all court matters (including crimes, civil cases, even divorces and paternity and tax liens) for $30/mo through its XChange system.

The federal judiciary provides charge, disposition, docket, and relevant documentation of all memos, motions and judgments on PACER . On PACER you pay $.08/page.

Other states do the same though I can’t say which. I’ve used CCAP, XChange and PACER professionally and love the march of more, more, more information. I’m not a fan of the sex offender registry (it seems unfair), but I would love a registry of all charges from speeding tickets on up to murder in every state for free.

Anyone, vigilante-prone or otherwise, can walk down to the courthouse and get this information right now in any district in the nation. What makes anyone think that having this information on one’s own PC is more likely to make vigilantes outta people?

Will it inspire idle browsing? Absolutely, but that’s a good thing. What’s wrong with people becoming more familiar with the justice system by learning about the experiences of their intimates? Gossip is usually more merciless than the truth anyway, so what people find out about each other will probably underwhelm.

What makes anyone think that having this information on one’s own PC is more likely to make vigilantes outta people?

I dunno–perhaps the vigilante acts that have already happened as a result of sex offender registration/community notification? The four murders most publicized were committed by folks who pulled the info off the internet.

As far as sex offenders are concerned, they’ve always been a target to some degree. But it was rather rare to have them routinely harassed and assaulted, their property smashed and burned, and their families threatened before the online registries. There is a record of increased incidents. Just sayin’.

I agree. While these records have always been part of the public domain, it does require some effort to go to the courthouse and ask for that information.

Sitting at your desk, surfing idly, doesn’t quite present the same hurdles and inconveniences.

Which is why I think that if these registries are to be implemented, there should be data collection. If you want to find out the record of someone, you have to tell the system who you are.

Here’s an old article relevant to the matter:

http://www.kxmb.com/t/montana/17765.asp

“Fresh out of prison, Kerry Skora would much rather be known as a murderer than a sex offender. The law said otherwise.”

While we continue to debate how to rehabilitate the criminal.They continue to murder,rob,sexually abuse children and run drugs all over this country. These people when convicted should be given a lobotomy immediately.Wake up!!! You are losing your freedoms and rights to the criminal element in your USA.They are in your neighborhoods,police depts,local and state govt.