Brandishing the Mark of Cain: Defects in the Adam Walsh Act
(registration required)
Joseph L. Lester, Professor of Law, Faulkner University
Considers sex offender registration requirements under the federal Adam Walsh Act. “Because the social stigma is so great,” he argues, “the brush used to mark sex offenders needs to be precise. Not every person convicted of a sex crime should be designated as a sex offender.” The Adam Walsh Act, however, uses overly broad categories and provides no process by which individual sex offenders can show that they are not so dangerous as to require registration. The author argues in favor of new procedures that would involve asking a jury to determine whether an offender is likely to reoffend before registration is required.
American and Canadian Approaches to Sex Offenders
A Study of the Politics of Dangerousness
(registration required)
Michael Petrunik, Adjunct Professor of Criminology, University of Ottawa; Adjunct Professor of Sociology, Carleton University
Canada has followed a markedly different path than the United States in developing legal responses to sex crimes. Criminologists Michael Petrunik and Lisa Murphy and psychiatrist J. Paul Federoff recount the Canadian experience and suggest reasons why the United States has moved so much more quickly to a “community protection” model, which emphasizes risk assessment and management over both treatment and individual due process rights. The authors also question the effectiveness of community notification laws and other measures that have been adopted in the name of community protection. They argue instead for expanded use of “community support and accountability reintegration programs,” which have been used with success in Ontario.
From Wetterling to Walsh: The Growth of Federalization in Sex Offender Policy
(registration required)
Richard G. Wright, Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice, Criminal Justice Department, Bridgewater State College
Criminologist Richard Wright argues that Congress has not relied on “research and reason” in adopting new sex offender laws. He examines the national experience with sex offender registration and notification laws prior to the Adam Walsh Act and finds a “lack of empirically demonstrated efficacy, untold financial costs, and faulty promises of sexual assault prevention.” Congress nonetheless greatly expanded registration and notification requirements in 2006 through its adoption of the Walsh Act. The author contends that this new statute, like earlier sex offender laws, is likely to produce a variety of unintended consequences, including significant new fiscal burdens on local-level government, vigilante attacks against offenders, and increased difficulty for offenders in becoming rehabilitated.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Analysis of Sex Offense Recidivism
Empirical Analysis of Sex Offense Recidivism (PDF)
This report is a summary of a research article forthcoming in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Justice Quarterly.
Levenson, J. S., Letourneau, E., Armstrong, K., & Zgoba, K. (2009, in press). Failure to register as a Sex Offender: Is it associated with recidivism? Justice Quarterly.
Purpose:
In 2006, the Adam Walsh Act was passed, lengthening registration periods, requiring more frequent updating of registrant information, and expanding the number of sex offenders to whom notification requirements apply. The Adam Walsh Act (AWA) also increased penalties for sex offenders who fail to comply with registration obligations. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between failure to register as a sex offender and subsequent recidivism. We sought to determine whether, as a group, sex offenders who failed to register differed significantly from compliant registrants on relevant risk variables.
Conclusions:
The current study indicates that sex offenders who fail to comply with registration are not more apt to reoffend sexually, but substantial resources are spent for enforcement, and, as required by the Adam Walsh Act, to incarcerate violators.
This report is a summary of a research article forthcoming in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Justice Quarterly.
Levenson, J. S., Letourneau, E., Armstrong, K., & Zgoba, K. (2009, in press). Failure to register as a Sex Offender: Is it associated with recidivism? Justice Quarterly.
Purpose:
In 2006, the Adam Walsh Act was passed, lengthening registration periods, requiring more frequent updating of registrant information, and expanding the number of sex offenders to whom notification requirements apply. The Adam Walsh Act (AWA) also increased penalties for sex offenders who fail to comply with registration obligations. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between failure to register as a sex offender and subsequent recidivism. We sought to determine whether, as a group, sex offenders who failed to register differed significantly from compliant registrants on relevant risk variables.
Conclusions:
The current study indicates that sex offenders who fail to comply with registration are not more apt to reoffend sexually, but substantial resources are spent for enforcement, and, as required by the Adam Walsh Act, to incarcerate violators.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Is Megan's Law Worth It?
Schneier.com : Is Megan's Law Worth It?
A study from New Jersey shows that Megan's Law—laws designed to identity sex offenders to the communities they live in—is ineffective in reducing sex crimes or deterring recidivists.
The study, funded by the National Institute of Justice, examined the cases of 550 sex offenders who were broken into two groups—those released from prison before the passage of Megan's Law and those released afterward.The researchers found no statistically significant difference between the groups in whether the offenders committed new sex crimes.
Similarly, the researchers found no significant difference in the number of victims of the two groups. Together, the offenders had 796 victims, ages 1 to 87. Most of the offenders had prior relationships with their new victims, and nearly half were family members. In just 16 percent of the cases, the offender was a stranger.
One complicating factor for the researchers is that sex crimes had started to decline even before the adoption of Megan's Law, making it difficult to pinpoint cause and effect. In addition, sex offenses vary from county to county, rising and falling from year to year.
Jessica's Law : Re-write it or Drop it
LAtimes.com : Revisit Jessica's Law
The sex-offender statute is unaffordable and doesn't improve safety. If it can't be dropped, it should be rewritten.
Among its many failings, the measure doesn't distinguish between criminals who are at high risk of re-offending and those who aren't. That means a teenager convicted of having sex with his underage girlfriend, as just one example, is subject to GPS monitoring and residence restrictions for the rest of his life, even if he never commits another crime. It also fails to specify what agency is responsible for monitoring those thousands of former inmates, or to devote money to pay for it.
The expense might be worthwhile if Jessica's Law were actually reducing sex crimes. Yet research has found no connection between where a sex offender lives and the likelihood that he'll offend again, nor is there any evidence that GPS monitoring lowers recidivism. Further, it's very hard for parolees to find homes that aren't near schools or parks, leading to a 12-fold increase in the number of homeless sex offenders since the law was passed in 2006. A lack of stable housing only increases the odds that an ex-con will return to crime -- or as the state Sex Offender Management Board put it in a report Tuesday: "Residency restrictions that preclude or eliminate appropriate offender housing can threaten public safety instead of enhancing it."
Lawmakers rarely show the courage to fix problems created by get-tough-on-crime voter initiatives, but there will never be a better time to improve Jessica's Law. Ideally, the measure should be overturned, but at a minimum the Legislature should create a review process that allows low-risk offenders to escape the residency and monitoring rules. California simply can't afford to pay more to be less safe.
The sex-offender statute is unaffordable and doesn't improve safety. If it can't be dropped, it should be rewritten.
Among its many failings, the measure doesn't distinguish between criminals who are at high risk of re-offending and those who aren't. That means a teenager convicted of having sex with his underage girlfriend, as just one example, is subject to GPS monitoring and residence restrictions for the rest of his life, even if he never commits another crime. It also fails to specify what agency is responsible for monitoring those thousands of former inmates, or to devote money to pay for it.
The expense might be worthwhile if Jessica's Law were actually reducing sex crimes. Yet research has found no connection between where a sex offender lives and the likelihood that he'll offend again, nor is there any evidence that GPS monitoring lowers recidivism. Further, it's very hard for parolees to find homes that aren't near schools or parks, leading to a 12-fold increase in the number of homeless sex offenders since the law was passed in 2006. A lack of stable housing only increases the odds that an ex-con will return to crime -- or as the state Sex Offender Management Board put it in a report Tuesday: "Residency restrictions that preclude or eliminate appropriate offender housing can threaten public safety instead of enhancing it."
Lawmakers rarely show the courage to fix problems created by get-tough-on-crime voter initiatives, but there will never be a better time to improve Jessica's Law. Ideally, the measure should be overturned, but at a minimum the Legislature should create a review process that allows low-risk offenders to escape the residency and monitoring rules. California simply can't afford to pay more to be less safe.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
`No Parole for Sex Offenders' Act
`No Parole for Sex Offenders' Act - 111th U.S. Congress, 1st Session. H. R. 1375 - March 6, 2009
Sponsors: Rep Chandler, Ben [KY-6], Rep Myrick, Sue Wilkins [NC-9], Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] -
Introduced 3/6/2009 Bill HR 1375
"To ensure that sex offenders and sexually violent predators are not eligible for parole."
Contact your U.S. Representatives (also the above sponsors and the House Judiciary Subcommittee)
to tell them that this bill violates the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution
Sponsors: Rep Chandler, Ben [KY-6], Rep Myrick, Sue Wilkins [NC-9], Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] -
Introduced 3/6/2009 Bill HR 1375
"To ensure that sex offenders and sexually violent predators are not eligible for parole."
Contact your U.S. Representatives (also the above sponsors and the House Judiciary Subcommittee)
to tell them that this bill violates the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution
Arrested For Living In Apartment With Playground
digtriad.com (N.C.) : Sex Offender Arrested For Living In Apartment With Playground.
An additional charge for one count of 'sex offender unlawfully on premises' was added because the apartment complex had a playground primarily used for children.
An additional charge for one count of 'sex offender unlawfully on premises' was added because the apartment complex had a playground primarily used for children.
Law is Driving Sex Offenders into Hiding
greenbaypressgazette.com : Official: Ordinance driving sex offenders into hiding.
Green Bay's sex offender residency requirements appear to be driving sex offenders into hiding, a prison official says. Tom Smith, who works for the Department of Corrections' sex offender registration program, spoke to the city's Sex Offender Residency Board Wednesday.
Since May 2007, after the city passed its sex offender residency ordinance and established the board to hear appeals, noncompliance with the state registry has jumped, just as state officials had predicted it would, Smith said.
Green Bay's ordinance forbids convicted sex offenders from residing within 2,000 feet of a school, park or other gathering place for children. Sex offenders who established residency prior to the passage of the ordinance are exempt unless they want to re-locate within the city.
Because of the number of gathering places for children in the city, the ordinance effectively prohibits offenders from living in all but a few mostly-unpopulated parts of the city.
Smith had lobbied against passage of the ordinance in 2007 and favors elimination of the ordinance.
In addition, it's greatly complicating the process of providing ex-convicts with one of the important things they need to stay out of trouble — a place to live.
The location of a sexual predator's residence has little to do with where his offense is likely to occur, Smith said. He spoke of a case in Calumet County where the offender drove from his home in New York to assault a girl he'd met over the Internet. "That's more than 2,000 feet, isn't it?" said Arthur Taylor, the residency board chairman.
One possible change would be to reduce the 2,000-foot distance to something like 500 feet, using it to establish enforceable safety zones rather than to exclude convicted sex offenders from living in the city, he said.
Green Bay's sex offender residency requirements appear to be driving sex offenders into hiding, a prison official says. Tom Smith, who works for the Department of Corrections' sex offender registration program, spoke to the city's Sex Offender Residency Board Wednesday.
Since May 2007, after the city passed its sex offender residency ordinance and established the board to hear appeals, noncompliance with the state registry has jumped, just as state officials had predicted it would, Smith said.
Green Bay's ordinance forbids convicted sex offenders from residing within 2,000 feet of a school, park or other gathering place for children. Sex offenders who established residency prior to the passage of the ordinance are exempt unless they want to re-locate within the city.
Because of the number of gathering places for children in the city, the ordinance effectively prohibits offenders from living in all but a few mostly-unpopulated parts of the city.
Smith had lobbied against passage of the ordinance in 2007 and favors elimination of the ordinance.
In addition, it's greatly complicating the process of providing ex-convicts with one of the important things they need to stay out of trouble — a place to live.
The location of a sexual predator's residence has little to do with where his offense is likely to occur, Smith said. He spoke of a case in Calumet County where the offender drove from his home in New York to assault a girl he'd met over the Internet. "That's more than 2,000 feet, isn't it?" said Arthur Taylor, the residency board chairman.
One possible change would be to reduce the 2,000-foot distance to something like 500 feet, using it to establish enforceable safety zones rather than to exclude convicted sex offenders from living in the city, he said.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
How Does Adam Walsh Act Affect You?
triedbyconscience.blogspot.com : If it saves one child...
A well written editorial article written by John Locke
Excerpt:
Rights are only rights so long as they are defended for all. Creating classes, for any reason, that are outside of those protections only ensure that such classes will infinitely expand. They say 'if it saves one child, it's worth it', right? Well, consider how many children are now being charged under it. How many children must be destroyed before one is saved?
Well-intentioned laws that destroy their rights, their immunities, their liberty and freedom ensure that no child will ever grow up... unmolested by the government, and with the liberties that were to be ensured into perpetuity.
Harming anyone is wrong... whether by law, or by action. Perhaps it is time to hold our legislators, or bureaucrats, our congressmen, our police officers, our corporations to task for the harm that they do, and our lawyers, judges, and those that execute the law for the harm they permit.
A well written editorial article written by John Locke
Excerpt:
Rights are only rights so long as they are defended for all. Creating classes, for any reason, that are outside of those protections only ensure that such classes will infinitely expand. They say 'if it saves one child, it's worth it', right? Well, consider how many children are now being charged under it. How many children must be destroyed before one is saved?
Well-intentioned laws that destroy their rights, their immunities, their liberty and freedom ensure that no child will ever grow up... unmolested by the government, and with the liberties that were to be ensured into perpetuity.
Harming anyone is wrong... whether by law, or by action. Perhaps it is time to hold our legislators, or bureaucrats, our congressmen, our police officers, our corporations to task for the harm that they do, and our lawyers, judges, and those that execute the law for the harm they permit.
Korea, India Sex Offender Laws
english.chosun.com : Lawmakers Want Still Tougher Laws on Child Sex Crime.
Legislators in South Korea are working on a plan to dismantle the nation’s statute of limitations on sex crimes, which was recently extended from seven to ten years.
indiatime.com : Does India need sex offender registries?
Legislators in South Korea are working on a plan to dismantle the nation’s statute of limitations on sex crimes, which was recently extended from seven to ten years.
indiatime.com : Does India need sex offender registries?
Yet Another Place Sex Offenders Can't Live
Mercurynews.com : Lawmakers debate sex offender bill.
Carson City, Nev.— Nevada lawmakers debated a bill Tuesday that would provide additional protections to victims of sex offenders, by prohibiting the offenders from moving within 1,000 feet of the victims.
Assemblyman Lynn Stewart, R-Henderson, who introduced AB325 , told the Assembly Corrections, Parole and Probation Committee that as the law is written now, offenders could move across the street or next door to their victims. (Where will these boundaries end?)
Carson City, Nev.— Nevada lawmakers debated a bill Tuesday that would provide additional protections to victims of sex offenders, by prohibiting the offenders from moving within 1,000 feet of the victims.
Assemblyman Lynn Stewart, R-Henderson, who introduced AB325 , told the Assembly Corrections, Parole and Probation Committee that as the law is written now, offenders could move across the street or next door to their victims. (Where will these boundaries end?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
