Sex offender registries: They’re not just for sex offenders anymore

[Jackpine Radical]

http://thelegalwatchdog.blogspot.com/2010/12/sex-offender-registries-theyre-not-just.html

Our nation’s preoccupation with tracking sex offenders comes at a high cost. Between the fifty states and the federal government, we’re spending hundreds of millions of dollars on sex offender registries each year, in addition to the billions spent on incarceration and community supervision. However, these registries aren’t all they’re cracked-up to be, in part because they’re flooded with useless information. For each violent rapist, a registry may contain dozens of teenagers who had consensual sex with younger teens, and dozens of other teens who were convicted of “sexting,” urinating in public, or similar behavior. But, perhaps the biggest problem with sex offender registries is that they’re not just for sex-related crimes anymore.

In addition to dramatically expanding what constitutes a “sex crime,” many states have boldly crossed the line and require registration for crimes that aren’t remotely related to sex, pornography, or even public urination. An excellent example of this trend can be found in the Wisconsin case of State v. Smith, where Smith, a 17-year-old boy, made another 17-year-old boy go with him to collect a debt. Smith was convicted of felony false imprisonment for this behavior and, because his “prisoner” was a minor, the state forced Smith to register as a sex offender. (Smith, also 17-years-old, was not considered a minor. Wisconsin considers accused 17-year-olds to be adults.)

Everyone agreed that Smith’s behavior was completely non-sexual. In fact, his obvious motivation in taking his fellow 17-year-old to collect the debt was purely financial. Despite this, Wisconsin’s highest court rejected Smith’s commonsense argument that “the purpose of the sex offender registry is to protect the public from sex offenders.” Instead, the court held, even people accused of non-sex crimes can be forced to register, because it could assist law enforcement. ]

[Dawson Leery]

1. And the God Damn John Walsh's of this world are to blame

for goading a weak and fearful public for this nonsense.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TroglodyteScholar]

27. The John Walsh's what?

What of his is to blame?

</grammarnazi>

[Hannah Bell]

35. i've always felt there was something weird about that crime. walsh came from a monied

background.

the only man pardoned by bush, ottis toole, supposedly was the killer.

walsh became a media personality in the aftermath -- & was a prime agent in driving the whole pedophile/children aren't safe hysteria that led to 'sex offense' as a special category of crime subject to life-long punishment.

a lot of hinckey stuff there.

[RKP5637]

2. This is a F'ed up country, pure and simple! n/t

[Recursion]

3. All this while crime rates are at 50-year lows

:facepalm:

[KansasVoter]

4. So I know if a flasher lives close to me but not a 2nd degree murderer??

[Ilsa]

11. He might not be a "flasher". He might be a guy who at 17

got to third base with a 15 year old girl that he thought was 18. That's how useless the registry is becoming. It's flooded with nonsense. No one will take it seriously anymore.

[one_voice]

25. This is one of the biggest flaws..

with this. I don't even want to imagine how many lives were ruined because of this. I've seen many stories and it's scary.

[Warren Stupidity]

39. or somebody who had to pee really badly

apparently non sex offenders piss their pants instead.

[Odin2005]

41. when I turned 18 my GF was still15 for a couple more months.

:banghead:

[MadHound]

29. Where does it end?

You want to know where all the sex offenders and 2nd degree murderers are, your neighbor wants to know where all the convicted drug felons are, his neighbors wants to know where all the DUI's are, and on and on and on.

Where does it end? When we wind up tattooing peoples' foreheads?

This is one of the reasons why I oppose sex offender registries. When some slippery slope is offered, such as urine testing, or registries, the legal and legislative system cooperate to lead us all down that slope with all due possible speed.

[KansasVoter]

30. I agree, but how stupid is it I dont know where attempts murder people live but I do flashers!

[MadHound]

36. You do realize that most murders are done by family members towards each other

A murderer living down the street is highly unlikely to harm you. Besides, once they've paid their price, what business is it of yours?

[Jackpine Radical]

73. A sex offender living down the street is unlikely to harm you.

You do realize that most sex offenses are done by family members toward one another, or among acquaintances. Stranger rapes and molestations are statistically rare in comparison.

[kath]

33. Speaking of slippery slopes and urine testing, are you aware of the huge number of school districts

that require random drug testing for any high school (and in some cases middle school) student who participates in an extracurricular activity and/or drives to school?
Total fucking bullshit police state tactics, and a warrantless, non-suspicion based search -- yet many parents go along with it, because they think it will"keep the kids safe" from drugs.
BAAAAAAAAAAA. BAAAAAAAAAAAA. BAAAAAAAAAAA.

Bushco and his drug czar heavily promoted this stuff, but it continues to proliferate in school district after school district and the Obama administration does NOTHING to stop it.

[arcane1]

5. If we're going to have these registries...

Why would not other violent crimes be included? :shrug:

[Jackpine Radical]

7. The effectiveness of the registries in reducing sex offense recidivism

has been studied. The registries are quite useless. See the following study, for example. I include the abstract:

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 2008, Vol. 14, No. 4, 284–302
Copyright 2008 by the American Psychological Association
DOI: 10.1037/a0013881

DOES A WATCHED POT BOIL? A Time-Series Analysis of New York State’s Sex Offender Registration and Notification Law
Jeffrey C. Sandler, Naomi J. Freeman, and Kelly M. Socia University at Albany

Abstract
Despite the fact that the federal and many state governments have enacted regis- tration and community notification laws as a means to better protect communities from sexual offending, limited empirical research has been conducted to examine the impact of such legislation on public safety. Therefore, utilizing time-series analyses, this study examined differences in sexual offense arrest rates before and after the enactment of New York State’s Sex Offender Registration Act. Results provide no support for the effectiveness of registration and community notification laws in reducing sexual offending by: (a) rapists, (b) child molesters, (c) sexual recidivists, or (d) first-time sex offenders. Analyses also showed that over 95% of all sexual offense arrests were committed by first-time sex offenders, casting doubt on the ability of laws that target repeat offenders to meaningfully reduce sexual offending.

[Ilsa]

16. I never figured a registry would reduce recidivism.

I figured it was a PR thing so people could check to see if there were any creepy neighbors around.

[xchrom]

6. Recommend

[valerief]

8. Time to rename it to the Gender Offender Registry.

All you need is a gender to get on it.

[Still a Democrat]

9. Registries are useful

In our state it's easy to determine who lives close to you and the crime they committed.

Why would anyone object to that?

[Codeine]

10. Because it isn't anybody's fucking business.

They committed a crime, received a sentence, and served out their punishment. Now they're done. I've never committed a crime more serious than speeding and rolling a stop sign in my entire life and even I can see that's bullshit.

[Still a Democrat]

44. It's public record anyway - it's everybody's business

If I wanted to know what my neighbor's criminal background was, it could be done. This just makes it easier.

[Hydra]

67. Would you like how you voted to be publically available

So the teabaggers can stop by your house and burn you at the stake?

[Still a Democrat]

70. Your comparison makes no sense

No one is advocating a registry so molesters can be attacked. And how is this related to the simple act of voting?

[Hydra]

72. Because it's as related as keeping track of "criminals" after they are let out

As someone posted further up, you are trying to scarlet letter people who could be innocent, but even if they aren't, once they are out of jail they've served their time. Why should that info be relevant at that point, if not for discrimination purposes.

Just like if we painted your house the color that you voted. If it gets firebombed, it's not anyone's fault, right? No one made you vote the way you did.

[GoneOffShore]

14. An abundance of caution?

Look out, your shadow is behind you.

[Still a Democrat]

45. Look out, you have a houseful of kids and a molester moved in next door n/t

[GoneOffShore]

53. Welcome to the land of the scared and home of the fearful.

There's a molester behind every tree and on every bus and train.

Stranger! Danger!

The registries are a way to surveil citizens. And not the first step to central control of society.

Every time I hear an apologist for these things - Offender registries (and as the OP states, they're not just for "sex offenders" anymore), the TSA, extreme border control, DEA, SWAT teams, surveillance cameras, warrantless wiretaps, data mining - I hear someone who is willing to "give up essential liberties for a little security".

And these things offer little security - they offer us a "security binky" and a bit of CYA "security theatre" for the politicians so they can point and say, "See, we are doing something!"

And the real prize goes to those who constantly trot out - "Think of the children!"

[Still a Democrat]

69. The molester lost his liberty when he committed the crime

Just as incarceration and probation deny someone liberty, they lose that when they commit a crime.

It isn't paranoid to want to know if your neighbor or a potential daycare provider is a molester.

[GoneOffShore]

75. Again, welcome to the land of the surveilled and home of the fearful.

By the use of these registries we all lose freedom incrementally.

They are neither effective nor do they really protect anyone. They merely give folks who are afraid of their own shadows a security binky.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

21. No, wait, let me guess, if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide, right? -nt

[Still a Democrat]

46. If I had a criminal record it would be public n/t

[Roy Rolling]

37. Different Question

The question is, if someone has paid for their crimes, what business is it of mine? It is not the public's responsibility to enforce the law---society has a police force to do that. And all police forces have the information on previous convictions so they are well-informed and can do their job.

The idea that amateur detectives and crime-novel enthusiasts are needed to babysit criminals is why I object. Registries are not a useful crime-fighting tool but are pacifiers to the paranoid and self-righteous, and a tool for weasel politicians to get votes by being unneccessarily harsh.

In an enlightened society, forgiveness is a virtue and mass stonings are primitive.

[Still a Democrat]

47. If the person next door is a child molester, that matters

We have one not that far from our house and I'm glad I know.

[NYC Liberal]

38. Because if sex offenders are so dangerous that all this nonsense is really needed -

the registry, requiring notification of moves, restricting where they can live and walk - then they should stay in prison, not be walking the streets.

[Still a Democrat]

50. We often restrict freedom and activities after time is served

Probation, restrictions on travel, jobs that can be held, etc. This is similar.

[NYC Liberal]

57. So which website can I go to and find the names, addresses,

photos, and charges of the murderers, burglars, and other violent criminals in my neighborhood?

Go to Google and type in "convicted sex offender locator." All of the results are searchable databases where I can find all the sex offenders in my neighborhood/state.

Now type in "convicted murderer locator." Nothing. Type in "convicted buglar locator." Nothing.

Frankly, I'd much rather know if a convicted burglar or someone convicted of assault was living near me than a sex offender. People with kids might want to know though, so if we are going to have one at all, let's have a searchable database of ALL convicted criminals.

[Still a Democrat]

68. My guess is they are considered different

because a sex offender is prone to repeating his acts against neighborhood children. Also, this type of crime is more preventable with parental knowledge of the situation. A murderer or burglar is not as likely to repeat their offense in their neighborhood, nor will advance knowledge on the part of the neighbor likely prevent him from doing it.

But you can make the case for a searchable databases of other criminals.

[NYC Liberal]

74. I suppose my point is that if sex offenders are that dangerous

and prone to repeat offenses, they should be given longer sentences rather than trying to track all of them and restrict where they work, live, and even walk.

[WolverineDG]

48. because they're often out of date & very wrong

how would you like it if some "sex offender" listed YOUR address as his? Yes, that does happen. *SURPRISE*

dg

[Still a Democrat]

51. Then he may get a free trip back to prison *SURPRISE*

Keeping it up to date accurate is required - but I'll admit it isn't perfect.

[enuegii]

61. Self-delete...

[WolverineDG]

78. Um, the *he* in this scenario is *you*

because all your neighbors are going to know is that *your* address is listed on the sex offender registry (whether it's because the list is out of date or someone lied & gave your address) & as far as they're concerned, *you* are the perv.

dg

[mwooldri]

49. I object to one thing: after a time, certain crimes should be "spent".

They should not be on a criminal record. They should not be on any kind of registry.

This is the one thing I hate about America. You get caught doing a very minor crime, and it's on your record permanently. Heck, the USA will deny you a visitors' visa if you admit you have been ARRESTED in your life - e.g. if you've been in a protest, got arrested for "breach of the peace", spent a night in a police cell and let go the next day, with no charges being pressed - that is enough to keep you out as a plain old visitor.

Let's say a 19 year old steals something not of a major dollar value from a convenience store and gets caught, arrested and has to pay a fine or do some kind of community service. Fast forward 40 years... that 19 year old is now 49 years old, and still has that minor theft on their criminal record.

I say that if this is the only crime that was committed and the 19 year old does their "time" and serves their "punishment" then after X number of years the crime should be purged from the criminal record database.

[Still a Democrat]

52. It's often overdone and sentences are often too long, I agree

but the registry seems to be one more tool, like probation.

[shawn703]

59. Then expand it to include all crimes

Especially the white-collar ones. It'll make it easier for the new revolutionaries to find people to line up for the guillotines when the time comes.

[Time for change]

12. I fear that we're on the road to becoming a police state

Our scandalously high and rising prison rate says it all.

This is all very scary and disgusting.

[GoneOffShore]

15. And Napolitano is helping along with her friend Chertoff.

She's buying the Rapiscan Porn-O-Scope for airports, train stations and coming soon to a shopping mall near you.

"Your papers, please."

[Warren Stupidity]

40. rear view mirror perspective

we got on that road a long time ago.

[sarcasmo]

66. Time for change I think we are closer than you realize.

[lonestarnot]

13. Motherfucking Wisconsin again. WTF is wrong with people there?

I thought that place was full of liberals?

[Jackpine Radical]

24. It used to be.

The corporations have now pretty much bought the Supreme Court. They (Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce & the Chamber of Commerce & various outside corporate interests) poured huge amounts of money into the last 2 SC elections to get rid of liberals on the Court. The elections were very dirty, and SC Justices are elected on off-year elections that draw very few people to the polls.

[TroglodyteScholar]

28. Seems like every time I move to a different state...

...it goes red in the next election cycle. See: GA in 2002 and WI in 2010.

I don't know why it happens, but I think next time I'll move to a red state and see if it turns blue. If not, I guess I'm just cursed.

[lonestarnot]

77. Please move here!

[lonestarnot]

76. Disgusting!

[msanthrope]

17. He shouldn't have pled to the charge, then. False imprisonment of a minor?

Yep--that's gonna get you on a list everytime. He should have gone to trial on the 'taking a hostage' charge.

Kidnapping, unlawful restraint, and confining a minor are crimes concurrent to sex crimes against children. I'm not surprised this was upheld.

[rufus dog]

19. third hand story

A guy is on the Golf Course and takes a piss behind a tree. A preschool is 200 yards away and a lady sees him and calls the cops. The cops catch the guy coming off the course and ask him if he relieved himself on the course and he admits that he did. He is now required to be a registered sex offender. No one says they saw anything other than one lady saying that she could tell he was taking a piss.

[FreeState]

20. This is nothing new - sexual minorities have been abused by these lists for years

GLBT men and transwomen in particular have been abused by these lists for years and years. Some states, like CA, have corrected the problems as best they claim they can and some states are still using these laws to harass and intimidate minorities.

[customerserviceguy]

22. Misuse of sex offender registries

does not mean that such registries are wrong. Why not simply condemn the wrongful use of these registries, rather than the whole concept of them?

[Jackpine Radical]

26. Because they do no discernible good.

Because they actually increase recidivism by preventing people from finding housing & jobs once they have a conviction on their record.

Because the public has a wildly inaccurate notion of sexual recidivism rates, thinking that all offenders will reoffend at the first opportunity.

Because the whole futile enterprise takes up a lot of resources that would be better spent on something useful.

[mrdmk]

32. I think there maybe a two prong approach going on here

1) The law and order crowd that has a philosophy of, once a person has a run in with the law, they will always be a problem to society. It is true there are repeat offenders, on the other hand, there is job security for the enforcer when using this approch. Psychosis runs on both sides of the fence. Also, just keeping a persons on the downs and out does have an advantage to some.

2) Dick Cheney did say, 'I do not have time to psychoanalysis the situation!' Mister Ruff and Tuff Guys (and Gals) like Cheney feel that the mental health industry is a waste of time and money. Why tie up resources when you can just run roughshod over a person and get the same results.

[DefenseLawyer]

63. I was in a small town courthouse the other day.

Killing time in a hallway outside the courtroom waiting for my case to be called. They had a huge wall of "Missing Children" fliers from around the country. 23 of them. Having nothing better to do I looked them over (and counted them). All but 3 of them were "last seen" with their "non-custodial parent". The other 3 sadly appeared to be teenage girls who had run away from home. So the vast majority of these "missing children" were with their father or mother. That's not to say that a parent who refuses to comply with a custody order isn't in the wrong, but it's a far cry from some nut scooping a child up off the street. Of course that does happen, and when it does it's awful; but it's rare. We have a very distorted view of the number of "child abductions" and an irrational fear of crime in general.

[bemildred]

23. Coming soon : "The War Against Sex". nt

[FLAprogressive]

31. There's a clear difference between sex "offenders" and sex "predators", people seem to lump the two

together though. And it's ruining lives.

[Jackpine Radical]

43. What is your definition of a sex predator

as distinct from a sex offender? Recidivism? Nature of the offense?

[Hannah Bell]

34. Is it fascism yet? And piss to all the hysterical fools who bought into the fraud

of "special" crimes which turn offenders into a permanent, unemployable pariah class subject to life-long surveillance & punishment.

Just the foot in the door for what's coming.

[GoneOffShore]

54. Thank you Hannah!

+1

[formercia]

56. They're called Proles

Life imitates Art.

[Odin2005]

42. Sex offender status should be for rapists and child molesters ONLY.

And by rapist I don't mean a 18yo convicted of statutory rape for having a 15yo GF.

[aikoaiko]

55. Sex offender lists do not need to be broadened and should probably be winnowed.

of people not likely to re-offend.

[Jackpine Radical]

58. Yes, but how do you determine that?

The fact is, most sex offenders are unlikely to re-offend, and we don't have good ways to determine who the few high-risk people are.

Many American sex-offender studies were subjected to a meta-analysis that ended up finding about a 5 or 6% likelihood of a new (detected) sex offense. How do you find the few cases that are almost sure to reoffend? Or alternatively, what level of recidivism risk warrants inclusion on the list? 5%? 20%? 50%? 60%?

I can tell you right now that there is no actuarial instrument based on new American data that will return a likelihood of recidivism of over 60% for any individual, and very few can be shown to have personal traits and histories that correspond to a 30% likelihood of recidivism.

[aikoaiko]

60. You are correct that there are few good ways of determining who will reoffend.

First, I'd be happy to winnow out the statutory rape folks who are now generally given a pass with Romeo and Juliette laws. The public urinaters are another group who could go off the list.

On the other hand, recidivism may not be the best measure of reoffending with sex offenders. We know that sex offenses are more difficult to prosecute and that case studies show some individuals victimizing dozens before being caught.

I'm not ready to throw out sex offender registries, yet, but as you point out they may not be as effective as proponents want.

Honestly, I would mind seeing the violent or serious offender registry. If any public record should be public, it should be the criminal records of those who ruin or damage lives.

[DefenseLawyer]

62. When fascism comes to America...

it will be draped in the flag and carrying a cross. Oh wait, never mind, it's already here.

[Glassunion]

65. You forgot the part where

it will be draped in the flag, carrying a cross and promising that we will all be safe.

[sarcasmo]

64. Michigan has the public urination as a sex crime. Raising Hope did a great episode

relating to the absurdity of this law. No one wanted a blue dot on their house which showed up on the website, and they showed all of the examples of how you could get the blue dot.

[rucky]

71. I had a problem with Megan's Law when it first came out.

and was called lots of awful things by people. I'm not a fan of sex offenders, but I am a big fan of the Eighth Amendment.

[Shandris]

79. I personally know a sex offender.

He grew up raised by his grandparents in a very cloistered conservative setting miles away from most people, taught that law is always just to those who are good people and mean no harm. Intention is the law, not the letter. He had one friend in school, one real friend at least - me. Part of it was because he had a disorder that no one knew the name of at the time. It wasn't really for years that Tourette's was diagnosed and had become public, but he was one of the first. To many with TS, he was lucky - he didn't have the cursing tic, but his motors and vocals were pretty bad. I'd met him in second grade and never met anyone more intelligent, generous, or polite, but later that year was when he developed TS. Needless to say, kids are cruel. At 15, he took off to live with his dad who had abandoned him 10 years earlier and had just moved back because he thought it would somehow be better. His dad was on his 4th wife, a woman 7 years younger than him. My friend kept in touch for a while, although he changed schools. He had learned to hide his TS for short periods of time, although it never really bothered me. Its one of those things you get used to. He graduated with honors, but college wasn't possible.

That summer he moved again, about 40 miles to a new city. Met some new would-be friends, and a girl who was way too young - 6 years younger than him. His friend was dating her older sister, so he was around a lot to hear the mother talk about how she wanted nothing more than the girl to get taken away by the state, or disappear, or SOMETHING. She downright hated the girl. My friend felt protective towards her, and somehow he 'fell in love' with her. He knew she was considered too young, but all his life he'd been told that the intention of the law was what mattered. It was obvious to him that anyone with the slightest shred of compassion could tell that this girl was being abused, and all he'd ever done was kiss her. According to him - and I've never known him to lie about much, so I don't think he lied about this - she had been a victim before, to her uncle, and she told him that this was nothing like that. That she loved him, etc. He had every intention of 'waiting' for her to get to a marriage age in some state, then heading there.

It's not hard to figure out how this turned out. He told her sister (after all, her sister felt bad that her mother hated the girl so damn much) and two months later the police arrived. He never denied it, never tried to lie, never asked for a lawyer. What he was doing was right. I'll never understand how someone so smart could be SO damn dumb at the same time, but it was all he'd ever known. The police charged him with 8 Class B Felonies.

The charges were eventually lessened and a meeting with the probation counselor ended with the counselor recommending NO jail time. The court took the advice, and so he got probation for 10 years, 8 year sentence suspended. He completed that without a hitch, but in the 9th year they changed the law to make registration lifetime.

When I found my friend again, he seemed the same person at first. But then I slowly started to get the story of what happened (ie, everything above) out of him over a night of vodka. He is just a shell of a person now. He has social anxiety so bad that he can't be around people for any length of time at all. More than 5 people in a theatre is enough to make him quietly walk out. On the incredibly rare occasions that we'll go out to a restaurant, he has to have 3 tables or more in every direction empty before he can speak. He drank himself to the point of death - he's dying of cirrhosis now. He still has no friends but me, but now its because he can't bring himself to even speak to non-essential people. His car has, in the last 12 months, been keyed 7 times, front quarter panel smashed in once, tires slit, antenna broken off twice, and mirror broken in. He's never been a danger to anyone, he's never been anything but a polite, generous, kind person. 18 solid years of this.

And the girl? She ended up marrying someone his age as soon as she became able to. Her mother wouldn't put up with her anymore. She even stopped by to see my friend before the wedding, but he wouldn't answer the door - it was against his probation.

The world will be a dimmer place once he's gone. So to every one of you people calling for registries, or going on about how there is 'no cure', or how 'these people' deserve no chances, they're scum, they should be shot, registries do no hard, and so on...

FUCK OFF AND DIE.

[Glassunion]

80. That is a terrible situation. I'm sorry for your friend.

[GoneOffShore]

81. I'm sorry for your friend. And I agree that registries are a terrible thing.