Posts tagged sex offenders
Off with their [family jewels]!
Jul 22nd
Update: Yes, there’s more! Prof. Berman provides this article, which quotes heavy rhetoric from the former Gov. of Alabama, Don Siegelman. A sampling:
"If it was up to me, I’d give them the death penalty on the first
offense," Siegelman said Friday. "The attorney general has the
Legislature in this special session. This is the perfect vehicle to do
this thing right. They need to quit being so namby-pamby and squeamish
about castration and put that back in the bill."
It’s final. We have now descended into the mystical, topsy-turvy, crazy and non-sensensical world of Alice and the Rabbit-Hole. The sex offender frenzy has reached impalatable and ridiculous heights. Prof. Berman reports that the Alabama House recently passed a bill calling for castration of sex offenders whose victims were under 12. I’m going to type that again, so you can absorb it…
CASTRATION.
Yep, that’s right.
CASTRATION.
This has got to stop. This is absurd, cruel, unusual and again, absurd.
The House passed a
bill Thursday that would require mandatory castration of persons
convicted of violent sex crimes against children under 12 and would
require them to wear electronic monitoring devices for the rest of
their lives after release from prison.The House, during more than three hours of debate, heavily amended
the legislation proposed by Gov. Bob Riley and Attorney General Troy
King. The House bill would prevent all convicted sex offenders from
working or loitering within 500 feet of a school, park or business that
educates or entertains children. The bill passed the House 96-0.
Some of the provisions are more normal: the 500 feet buffer zone, working near children and so on. But castration? Also what seems to be currying favor with legislators nationwide is the lifetime GPS monitoring requirement. I’d be willing to bet that there is a plausible ex-post facto claim there.
I have had a lot to say about this in the past and as long as this lunacy continues, I will have more to say. Again, for first-time readers, please don’t assume that I’m in favor of molesters, paedophiles and "the like". I’m just against sensationalist legislation that doesn’t take into account data-driven reality and logistics. Perhaps also the Constitution. Sadly, I’m in the minority. Tom might like this legislation.
For more of my rants on sex offenders, click here.
Sex-offender mania spreads to CT
Jul 21st
It seems that the wave of panic and corresponding reactionary legislation gripping the nation in regards to sex offenders has finally reached our liberal shores. Gov. Rell proposed new legislation yesterday, in an effort to toughen up CT’s sex offender laws. Among the highlights of this proposed legislation for the next term:
- A new classification of "sexual predator"; defined as one who "preys on young children and the elderly".
- Lifetime registration for sexual predators.
- Lifetime GPS monitoring for all sex offenders.
- Maintaining registration as a condition of parole, and penalties for failing to maintain registration.
- Penalties for anyone "harboring a sex offender".
I don’t even know where to begin. Lifetime registration for all? (Atleast that’s what the news report implies). Even those who were convicted of statutory rape and are therefore, "sex offenders"?
What’s more, her proposal calls for the offenders themselves to pay for the GPS monitoring. Oh, and Governor, there is already a statute for failure to register or to maintain registration. It’s called "Failure to Register" and is a D felony.
The last one is all the more troubling – and is somewhat akin to Sensenbrenner’s Family Snitch law. What does harboring mean? Is she proposing that if person A knows that person B is a sex offender and that person B has not registered, then person A is liable? Or will it be even broader and encompass all those giving shelter to a sex offender? (which, by the way, is becoming more and more difficult).
So you have zoning laws that say sex offenders can’t live within certain areas – and we’re constantly expanding these areas, shelters have strict rules about sex offenders because of the presence of children, landlords won’t allow sex offenders if there are children on the premises or else they’ll get into trouble with the DCF.
Why don’t we do what we all want to do? Pass a NATIONWIDE ordinance/law/statute banning sex offenders. Create an island in the pacific and ship them all off there. Isn’t that what it’s going to come to at some point?
Rationally speaking, why not increase penalties and actually care about rehabilitation in jails? That would seem to be the best way to deal with this "growing" problem, without imposing ridiculous demands.
This is a topic that is deeply important and provocative in society today. Unfortunately, passion overrules the mind and we’re not thinking about the most effective and efficient ways to deal with this, just the most sensationalist.
For more on my (generally unpopular) views on Megan’s Law, click here.
FL county bans sex offenders from Hurricane shelters
Jul 19th
When will this madness end? It now seems that Hillsborough County in Florida is banning sex offenders from their Hurrican shelters. Hurricane shelters!
Sheriff David Gee, Hillsborough County:
"My advice (for sex offenders) is to make arrangements in advance and go somewhere else because I think it’s going to be a problem."
What do you think they’re going to do with weathering a Hurricane? Molest somebody? This insanity has to stop! How reactionary (and absurd) is society becoming?
Fighting back, Howard Sluss and his wife Heather challenged the new policy at a town hall meeting hosted by the sheriff. The couple says the new policy puts their family, which includes 4 kids, at risk.
Heather Sluss, Howard’s Wife:
"As a mother of 4, I understand completely the need to keep your children safe. But what happens to those youthful offenders in those situations who have families, where are they supposed to go?"
Damn straight. This new policy affects 1200 people and yet nearby Manatee county is considering it as well.
Effect of Megan’s Law on Sex Offender Reintegration
Jun 21st
Two researchers from the Lynn University in Florida recently released a study [abstract] on the effect of Megan’s Law on reintegration of sex offenders into society.
Overall, about one third of participants had experienced dire events, such as the loss of a job or home, threats or harassment, or property damage. Physical assault was a relatively rare occurrence.
The majority identified negative effects, such as stress, isolation, loss of relationships, fear, shame, embarrassment, and hopelessness. Some participants noted positive effects of Megan’s Law, including motivation to prevent reoffense and increased honesty with friends and family.
Few sex offenders believed that communities are safer because of Megan’s Law, and more than half reported that the information posted about them on Florida’s Internet registry was incorrect. Implications for practice and policy are discussed.
This should not be news to anyone. I have long maintained that we are taking a far too extreme view on sex offenders and how they should be treated. (See this for example). This LATimes article does a good job of conductign interviews with sex offenders and with the authors of the survey.
In a study published this year, researchers surveyed 183 sex offenders
in Florida and found 27 percent said they lost a job because a boss or
co-workers found out about their crime, 20 percent had to move from
their home because a landlord found out, 15 percent had to leave after
neighbors complained, and 33 percent were threatened or harassed by
neighbors."I feel trapped in living where I do," one of those surveyed said.
Another said: "I welcome an early death."
Welcome an early death? That should set some alarm bells ringing. What are we doing to "these people"?
I had a client a few years ago who was charged with violation of Megan’s law in the state. More specifically, he was charged with failure to register after changing his address. Why did his address change? Because the owner of the house he was living in had problems with the Dept of Children and Families and had him evicted with just about an hour’s notice. Almost no shelter he went to would accept a couple convicted of sex-offenses (he was with his wife) and he ended up living under bridges and the sort till he was charged with this violation.
This is what Megan’s law (as currently formulated and applied) does more often than not. It displaces people, makes them lose jobs and essentially isolates them. What we are doing, in essence, is driving all "these people" out of every city in the country into some sort of massive "penitentiary" in the middle of nowhere that we will have to fund.
If we are that concerned about every single sex-offenders threat, then perhaps the route should be to lobby for longer sentences, perhaps those mirroring murder. Leave them in jail forever, even the 18 yr old who had sex with his 15 yr old girlfriend.
There needs to be information. There needs to be awareness. There does not need to be this current climate of intense monitoring and knee-jerk reactionism propelled by fear. GPS monitoring, lifetime registration and other such methods are merely hollow measures taken to placate our fear and cover up the real issue: the neglect of children by their families and our intense desire to snuff out anything that scares us.
Whither understanding and rehabilitation? People are individuals and each case should be treated as such – individually.
No rides for you!
May 23rd
Blondie comments on this WaPo article that Six Flags is now attempting to exclude sex offenders from their parks by including the following language on the back of their tickets:
the amusement park reserves the right to refuse entry to anyone
convicted of a sex crime or required to register as a sex offender.
What? After Miami’s asinine ordinances and Florida’s proposed legislation, this shouldn’t strike anyone as surprising, but it is just plain ridiculous. Blondie explores Six Flag’s idea in detail. She writes:
This brings so many thoughts to mind. First, how to they plan to
enforce this ban? It is unlikely that Six Flags will be conducting
background checks at the gates. Most likely, the only guests that Six
Flags will be check are season ticket applicants (since these
applicants have to supply their name and it may be possible to do a
background check in the time it takes to complete the season pass
application process, which typically includes a photograph and other
identity verification). But, would it be possible to do background
checks at the gates? Possibly. This would require asking every guest
for identification, and using their name (and possibly other
identifying information such as address or social security number) to
log onto the state’s sex offender registry or call into the registry.
This would still allow some people who have been convicted of sex
offenses or sex offenders entry since (1) the person may be registered
in another state or not currently registered or (2) the person may have
been convicted of a "sex crime" but not required to register or not
required to register at a level that makes his or her name available on
the internet or by phone.
So who else should do this? Who else should ban sex offenders?
In the meantime, who else could (or should) ban sex offenders ban? The
most obvious idea that comes to mind is internet service providers.
They’d have the means to do a check because subscribers give their
names and credit info, they could easily add language to their terms of
service that makes it a violation to allow a sex offender to use your
account, and I cannot think of a better advertisement for an ISP than
"Now Sex Offender Free!" But, who else? Let’s think of the non-obvious.
What about car dealerships selling vans? Shouldn’t they ban the sale of
vans to sex offenders (since, according to the nightly news, this is
what sex offenders so often use to pick up their victims)? Come to
think of it, that might also be a good defendant to add for all of
those victims’ parents filing lawsuits against the police and their
city…
I will refrain from writing anything myself, because it will only descend into cursing, name-calling and general destructive mayhem.
Suffice it to say that I am extremely annoyed and generally frustrated at these lame efforts made at the wrong end of the problem.
Legislature proposes amendment to Megan’s Law
May 20th
On the House calendar is H. B. 6749 [bill text] which seeks to amend certain provisions of the existing Megan’s Law statutes.
This bill refines the sex offender registry laws and makes statutory reporting language uniform. It reduces, from life to 10 years, the mandatory registration period for violators of several statutory rape offenses. It expands the current definition of "nonviolent sexual offense" to an attempt to commit, conspiring to commit, and aiding and abetting the commitment of fourth-degree sexual assault, subjecting perpetrators to a 10-year registration period.
The bill adds activities that trigger a registrant’s obligation to update his registry information and requires the Department of Correction commissioner to ensure that sex offenders in his custody are registered before he releases them.
The bill makes statutory rape offenses involving coaches, mentors, and custodians in positions of trust or power who engage in sexual intercourse with underage victims "criminal offenses against a victim who is a minor," requiring perpetrators to comply with sex offender registry laws for 10 years. Currently, they are "violent sexual offenses," which require lifetime registration.
Miami toughens up sex offender laws
Apr 27th
Ok, here’s the disclaimer, front and center: I’m probably going to say things in this post that most may not agree with, so if you’re not in the mood for a disagreement, don’t read.
Ok? Still here? You’ve been warned.
At PrawsBlawg (& Crimprof), I saw reports of a story that Miami is considering changing it’s sex offender laws (via zoning restrictions) that would basically drive all "sex offenders" out of the city. These restrictions are prompted by the slayings of two young girls.
New proposed laws in Florida include lifetime monitoring of some sex offenders by global satellite
positioning systems, mandatory 25-year prison terms for sex offenses
against children younger than 12, and automatic jailing of sex
offenders who violate probation until a judge can determine whether
they represent a threat.
I’ll address those proposed laws a little later. The Mayor’s measure
would more than double the buffer zone required between the homes of
registered sex offenders and schools, parks, school bus stops or any
”place where children regularly congregate."
I have some serious, serious reservations about this. It is one thing to impose lengthy sentences on "sex offenders" and then require them to register for life with their information available on a public website (which, unfortunately, the Supreme Court has held constitutional), but it is quite another to effectively bar them from a whole city. Not only does this proposed legislation raise equal protection concerns, it is exactly the kind of knee-jerk reaction that has effectively removed all notion of "correction" and "rehabilitation" from the criminal justice system.
Look, I know what you’re thinking: What the hell is wrong with this guy? I understand the importance of sex offender laws and the need to protect children. I am all for it. So, if sentences for certain sexual offenses need to be increased to keep "offenders" locked up longer and out of society longer – I’m all for it. But when we start getting to the point that "offenders" cannot live within a city then we really need to stop and think about what we’re doing.
Analogizing (and yes, you can analogize this situation to other crimes – because there is always a victim) this to say, robbery, why are we not passing ordinances, zoning laws and legislation that bars people convicted of two or more robberies from being within 1500 feet of a store? Experience in the criminal defense field will tell you that the most recidivist "criminals" are those with robberies, burglaries and assaults on their record. So let’s keep people convicted of assaults from within 1500 feet of any store where they can purchase a knife/gun/sharp instrument. In fact, let’s not even let them near kitchens!
See how absurd this is getting? If you want to effectively "ban" them from cities, just increase jail terms. That serves the same purpose.
The other problem is that not all sex offenders are convicted of Class A or Class B felonies. There are a large number of "sex offenders" who are convicted of offenses that involve nothing more than public indecency or, heck, don’t even involve children! Do we banish them too?
So we banish them. Then what? They go live in another city, or the countryside, or some small town. And that small town passes the same law and so they move elsewhere and so on and so on. What happens then? All the sex offenders in the country congregate in some remote vast open space in the middle of nowhere in, say, Montana? You think the residents of Montana will have nothing to say about that? That’s not a risk?
What about people that were convicted of a sexual offense 20 years ago and have not a blemish on their record since? What about those that are now working and hold jobs and have families? Do we banish the families too?
Again, I’m not belittling the horrific murders of the two young girls. But banishing all sex offenders is not the answer.
Let’s talk a little about this global positioning system tracking that’s been proposed. Do we need to know where "sex offenders" are every single minute of the rest of their lives? If we’re that concerned about where they are – leave them in jail!
All right. Here’s the deal: All I’m saying is that the "remedy" here is excessive and we really need to stop and think before we take such drastic measures. Is there a better alternative? One that is selective and targets only those that pose a real risk to the community and the safety of little children.
I told you my rant would piss you off.
Residents concerned over group home treating sex offenders
Feb 24th
WTNH reports this story where neighbors were concerned that a nearby group home was treating sex offenders. The problem arose when one of the clients there *cough*dumbass*cough* left without permission.
“I can’t believe it. You mean that house over there? You mean that hill, going up there? Oh, my God,” says Stephanie Nitowski.
“One of the guys got out on Sunday,” says Erin Cox [news reporter].“Oh my God. Are you kidding? I can’t believe it,” says Nitowski.
This group home at 1304 New Haven Road is run by ICES. It’s own webpage says it “…specializes in anger management, psychosexual issues, aggression and frustration…”
“I want to make sure that those facilities are both safe and secure and that their patients don’t get out of there again,” says Mayor Ron San Angelo, (R) Naugatuck.
While I understand the concern regarding escape of clients at these half-way houses, I cannot stand the reaction of people living in the neighborhood. Oh my God?
Everyone has a different take on sexual offenders. Well, it’s mostly everyone on one side and a few people (usually pd’s) on the other. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that sexual offenders are subject to recidivism and “cannot be cured”. While that may have some merit, I think it foolhardy to treat these people as the scurge of society. If we are truly committed to rehabilitation of inmates and criminals, then there is always someone going to be living next to a sex offender. We cannot put them in jail forever and forget about them, nor should we. There has to be greater social responsibility in the way these “offenders” are treated by us.
No one is asking you to invite them to your parties or let them babysit our children. However, we must not be surprised and react in a knee-jerk fashion to their presence. They are here, they are amongst us and they always will be. We need to understand that and accept it and learn to live around it.
recent comments