Advertise your website below and on the left of our blog today

  • Is that a Sexual Predator hiding behind that badge? (08/16/2013)
  • Click for more info
  • Click for more info
  • Click for more info
  • Click for more info
  • Click for more info
  • Click for more info
  • Click for more info
  • Click for more info
Support us today by using the donation links on the left
Showing posts with label AdamWalshAct. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AdamWalshAct. Show all posts

Thursday, May 9, 2013

MA - Foxborough Selectman Implores Judiciary Committee to Approve Sex Offender Registry and Notification Act

James DeVellis
Original Article

05/09/2013

By Jeremie Smith

Foxborough selectman James DeVellis testified Tuesday at the State House to offer his perspective - as the town’s elected official – of the merits for Massachusetts to enact the Adam Walsh Act (Sex Offender Registry and Notification Act).

Foxborough selectman James DeVellis was in Boston Tuesday testifying before the Judiciary Committee at the State House on behalf of the town and the victims of the [name withheld] sex abuse case to implore the state to enact the Adam Walsh Act (Sex Offender Registry and Notification Act).

I informed the Judiciary Committee of the [name withheld] issue that we are dealing with [in Foxborough] and the three questions that I was asked by [name withheld] victims,” DeVellis said.

DeVellis said the first two questions victims asked him were “how can a member of our community molest and rape probably hundreds of kids over decades without notice or action?” and “how do these victims come to the authorities years ago and be told either [statute of limitations] has expired or [name withheld] is in Florida now and out of jurisdiction?

We later came to find out [name withheld] continued on [in Florida] where he left off in Foxborough and as a teacher in Florida was caught doing it there with very little notification back and forth,” DeVellis said. “Both these questions Foxborough is struggling with but it is in the past and I am not looking for answers from the Judiciary Committee on these two questions.”

What DeVellis is looking for is the answer to the victims’ third question to the town, “What [are Foxborough officials] going to do to help assure this can never go undetected again in our town?

DeVellis hopes the answer includes the Commonwealth enacting the Adam Walsh Act.

I implored the Judiciary Committee to approve the Adam Walsh Act so our police, teachers, selectmen and parents have the tools to protect our kids in the most efficient way possible with the help of reporting and labeling sex offenders,” DeVellis said.

DeVellis explains Adam Walsh was a young boy abducted at a Florida shopping mall and later found murdered.
- And it was never proven he was sexually abused or that an ex-sex offender did the crime either.

In summary, the Act, which is also referred to as SORNA (Sex Offender Registry and Notification Act) allows states to categorize, track, notify and in the end protect our children at a higher level throughout the country,” DeVellis said. “Many states have enacted this but Massachusetts has not.”

See Also:



Monday, April 22, 2013

OH - Appeals Court Reverses Sex Offender’s Conviction, Can’t Be Reclassified under the Adam Walsh Act

Original Article

04/19/2013

By Jenna Gant

The Eighth District Court of Appeals ruled April 18 that a sex offender from California who moved to Ohio cannot be reclassified as a Tier III offender under the Adam Walsh Act.

[name withheld] was required to register his address annually for a period of ten years when he first moved to Ohio under the former Megan’s Law. In July 2007, the attorney general reclassified [name withheld] under the Adam Walsh Act, which required him to register his address every 90 days for life.

[name withheld] failed to register in July 2010 and was indicted on a single count of failing to register his address. [name withheld] tried to get the charge dismissed, arguing that his 2007 reclassification was unconstitutional under the 2010 Ohio Supreme Court case State v. Bodyke (PDF), which held that the attorney general’s reclassification of an offender from Megan’s Law to the Adam Walsh Act “violated the separation of powers doctrine because it would allow the executive branch to review a decision made by the judicial branch.”

The state argued that [name withheld]'s case is different than Bodyke because [name withheld]'s classification was made in California and not in Ohio.

Administrative Judge Melody J. Stewart wrote in the appeals court’s unanimous decision (PDF) that the Eighth District Court of Appeals has “repeatedly rejected the argument that there is a distinction between in-state and out-of-state offenders.”

Judge Stewart found that [name withheld]'s case is also not affected by the December 2012 Ohio Supreme Court decision State v. Brunning (PDF), in which the court held that “despite an offender who was originally classified under Megan’s Law being wrongly reclassified under the Adam Walsh Act, the state could still maintain a prosecution for a violation of the reporting requirements as long as the alleged violation also constituted a violation of Megan’s Law.”

Judge Stewart noted that Brunning was charged with failing to comply with a change of address requirement that was the same under both Megan’s Law and the Adam Walsh Act, while [name withheld] is required to register annually for 10 years under Megan’s Law, compared to every 90 days for life under the Adam Walsh Act.

Judges Mary J. Boyle and Tim McCormack concurred in the April 18 opinion that reversed the judgment of the trial court and remanded the case for further proceedings.


Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Patty Wetterling questions sex offender laws

Patty Wetterling
Original Article

03/20/2013

By Jennifer Bleyer

The outspoken activist has a change of heart over the wide-reaching scope of laws she helped put into action

On an overcast spring day in 1996, a handful of people filed out of the Oval Office and assembled on the driveway of the White House before a scrum of reporters. They cast satisfied glances at the television cameras as birds chirped and a helicopter whirred nearby. Nothing except for the white memorial ribbons pinned to their lapels indicated the nature of their fateful connection to each other as the parents of children kidnapped by strangers and, in all but one case, viciously assaulted and murdered.

Audio Source

Standing together, they represented a grim who's who of notorious child abductions of the late 20th century. On one end was John Walsh, whose six-year-old son, Adam, was abducted from a department store in Hollywood, Florida, in 1981 and later discovered decapitated. Then there was Marc Klaas, the father of Polly Klaas, a 12-year-old girl who was kidnapped at knifepoint from her bedroom in Petaluma, California, in 1993 and whose body was found two months later in a shallow grave. In the middle were Rich and Maureen Kanka, whose seven-year-old daughter, Megan, was kidnapped, raped, and murdered in 1994 by a convicted sex offender living across the street from their home in New Jersey. At the front of the group was Patty Wetterling, the mother of Jacob Wetterling, an 11-year-old who was abducted at gunpoint near his home in St. Joseph, Minnesota, in 1989 and never found.
- Let's not forget that Mr. Walsh also dated Reve when she was underage, but he seems to ignore that fact.

Skip forward to 5:46 to see him admit this

There was a stoic, familial air between the parents, a soldier-like bond. Minutes earlier inside the Oval Office, they had watched President Bill Clinton sign legislation known as Megan's Law, named for Megan Kanka, that required states to release information about registered sex offenders to the public. The law was an amendment to the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act, which was part of a landmark violent crime bill in 1994 that required law enforcement in every state to maintain registries of convicted sex offenders and track where they lived after being released from prison. The original law gave states the option of whether to notify the community of a sex offender's presence. Two years later, Megan's Law said that they must.


But before long the victorious mood at the press conference abruptly shifted. After the group thanked legislators who'd helped shepherd the law through, some reporters mentioned challenges to its constitutionality. The parents grew defensive. John Walsh, whose son's murder had led him to become a renowned campaigner for children's safety and eventually the host of TV's America's Most Wanted, pushed himself before the microphones and raised his voice.
- It was never proven that his son was sexually assaulted, nor if the person who did it, which they claim was Ottis Toole, was a known or unknown sex offender.  They also suspected Jeffrey Dahmer as well, but they settled with putting the blame on Mr. Toole.


"This is letting parents know that the fox is in the henhouse," Walsh said, jabbing a finger in the air. "We're sick of seeing these people get all the rights and our children and the parents not getting any rights. Believe me, I've hunted these people for nine years now. They're predators, they prey upon children — that's their business. We deserve to know these people are in our neighborhoods!"
- Mr. Walsh, in our opinion, is just angry, which is understandable, and is just wanting to avenge his sons death by punishing all ex-sex offenders for his sons death, even when it was never proven sex was even involved in his sons death.  Not all of those on the sex offender registry are predators who prey on children, regardless of what he says.

Patty Wetterling, a petite woman with a neat chestnut bob, looked dismayed in her taupe skirt suit. She interjected, explaining gently that Megan's Law was the equivalent of warning children about a dog in their neighborhood that's known to bite, and adding that it was not about revenge but ultimately just one piece in a large puzzle whose goal was a safe society.
- Patty is the reasonable one among the group.  John Walsh and Marc Klass are always foaming at the mouth when talking about sex offender laws.

"I do think it will have a positive effect," she said.

Several years later, Wetterling flew back to Washington for another press conference, this one announcing the most comprehensive proposed legislation ever to manage sex offenders. Again, she stood among a cohort of other parents who had suffered unspeakable tragedies.

The proposed law would set national standards for sex offender registration, establish civil commitment procedures for people deemed sexually violent predators, require the registration of kids as young as 14 who had committed sex offenses, and be applied even to people whose crimes predated the law and who had successfully completed their sentences.
- Punishing someone who has done their time and in which their crime was before the law came into being, is called an ex post facto law, and is unconstitutional.

By then, sex offender restrictions had mushroomed in a way that was starting to trouble Wetterling. In the years since Jacob's abduction, she had devoted her life to children's safety. But the more she learned about the nature of child sexual abuse, the more she felt like these laws simply didn't get to the root of the problem, and actually made it worse in ways that were hard for most people to grasp.

At the Washington press conference that day, members of the media sidled over to Wetterling to ask her for a comment about the proposed new law. In her earnest manner, she confessed to some misgivings.

"I do have a little bit of concern about it being retroactive," she admitted, "and that it's now going to register juveniles."

Later, on a glorious midsummer day in 2006, President George W. Bush was joined in the White House Rose Garden by lawmakers and victims' families, including John Walsh and his wife, Reve. The president delivered a triumphant speech. Then he sat down and signed the legislation known as the Adam Walsh Child Safety and Protection Act.




There are nearly 750,000 registered sex offenders in America today, up 23 percent from six years ago. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent each year on registering, publicizing, tracking, and confining them. Since the Wetterling Act was passed in 1994, laws governing sex offenders have grown successively stricter and more far reaching. In many places, residency restrictions dictate that sex offenders cannot live within a certain distance from schools, playgrounds, daycare centers, parks, bus stops, and other places where children gather. Online registries broadcast the names and pictures of offenders, often without specifying the nature of their offenses. Juveniles treated as adults and labeled as sex offenders for acts involving other kids bear that stigma well into adulthood.

Children being labeled as sex offenders?

Virtually all the major laws regarding sex offenders have been passed in the wake of grisly, high profile crimes against kids and, like Megan's Law, they bear victims' names as somber memorials. The laws tend to fuel the impression that sex offenders are a uniform class of creepy strangers lurking in the shadows who are bound to attack children over and over again.

That's what Wetterling used to believe about sex offenders, too. Yet over the course of two decades immersed in the issue, she found her assumptions slowly chipped away. Contrary to the widely held fear of predatory strangers, she learned that abductions like Jacob's are extremely rare, and that 90 percent of sexual offenses against children are committed by family members or acquaintances. While sex offenders are stereotyped as incurable serial abusers, a 2002 Bureau of Justice study found that they in fact have a distinctly low recidivism rate of just 5.3 percent for other sex crimes within three years of being released from prison.

No Easy Answers
Though the term "sex offender" itself seems to reflexively imply child rapist, a broadening number of so-called victimless crimes are forcing people onto the rolls. According to Human Rights Watch, at least 28 states require registration for consensual sex between teenagers, 13 for public urination, 32 for exposing genitals in public, and five for soliciting adult prostitutes. Restricting where sex offenders can live, in many cases forcing them into homelessness and disconnecting them from family and social support, hasn't had any quantifiable reduction on the rate of sexual abuse. And many sex offenders are really children themselves: Juveniles make up more than a third of those convicted of sex offenses against children, and their high amenability to treatment suggests that their youthful mistakes don't predict a lifetime of abuse to come.

These days, Wetterling is a 63-year-old grandmother with a warm smile, soft blue eyes, and a folksy manner. She's well known for her two campaigns for Minnesota's Sixth Congressional District, which she lost to Mark Kennedy in 2004 and Michele Bachmann two years later, as well as her personal story, which is deeply imprinted in the state's collective memory. Her eyes still gloss over with tears when she talks about Jacob.

She's less well known for having quietly emerged as perhaps the most unlikely voice questioning sex offender laws. Although she remains a prominent advocate for child safety — she is the board chair of the influential National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and the director of the Minnesota Health Department's sexual violence prevention program — she has expressed gnawing doubts over the past several years about how we deal with sex offenders, a striking stance for someone who has been personally affected in such a devastating way.

"We have an intolerance for sexual violence, which I agree with," she said recently over coffee downtown. "People want a singular solution, and the solution that's been sold over the years is lock 'em up and throw away the key. But we've cast such a broad net that we're catching a lot of juveniles who did something stupid or different types of offenders who just screwed up. Should they never be given a chance to turn their lives around?"

She paused.

"They are very different than the man who took Jacob."



Long before Wetterling became a public figure, she was a stay-at-home mother in the small town of St. Joseph. On the evening of October 22, 1989, she and her husband, Jerry, went to a party celebrating a local arts festival that she chaired. Their 11-year-old son Jacob stayed at home with his best friend, Aaron Larson, along with their other son Trevor, 10, and their eight-year-old daughter, Carmen. Trevor called over to the arts festival party and asked permission for the three boys to go to a local convenience store, where they could rent a movie and buy soda. They got a neighbor girl to come babysit Carmen and took off on bikes.

The boys were riding home in the dark when a masked man emerged from a gravel driveway along a country road. Pointing a gun, he told the boys to lie down in a ditch, demanded to know their ages, then ordered first Aaron and then Trevor to run into the nearby woods or risk being shot. By the time the two boys caught up to each other and dared to peek back, Jacob and the gunman were gone.

For the Wetterling family, the weeks and months that followed were an agonizing blur. Dozens of county, state, and federal investigators flocked to St. Joseph in the effort to find Jacob. Throngs of firefighters and student volunteers combed the surrounding woods and cornfields.

It soon hit the national news: Peter Jennings on ABC reported, "the effect on Jacob's family has been obvious, but his kidnapping has also torn the tightly knit social fabric of the entire town." Pictures of Jacob, a handsome, tawny-haired boy, were plastered at truck stops, tollbooths, and convenience stores across the Midwest. Billboards and bumper stickers pleaded for information. Thousands of fruitless tips poured in.

Investigators regretfully shared that the most common motive in this kind of abductions was sexual, and they felt all but certain that this was the case with Jacob.

Patty was shocked. "Who would do that?" she thought. "Who would ever think of sexually violating a child?"

The sheriff's office worked with a correctional facility in nearby St. Cloud to catalog recently released sex offenders and painstakingly created a database detailing where they lived to track them down for questioning.

By January 1990, the number of leads had dwindled and the FBI withdrew most of the agents it had assigned to investigate Jacob's abduction. Even so, his family remained hopeful. They poured their energy into keeping him in the public's awareness. It wasn't until about a year after his disappearance that Patty began to think beyond her immediate desperation to find her son and mustered some energy to try to help others.

She'd been ruminating about the database of local sex offenders the police had compiled, and how helpful they said such a resource would have been immediately after the abduction to enable them to quickly locate and rule out suspects. Patty felt certain that the database was a valuable law enforcement tool that shouldn't be filed away in some dusty cabinet. In fact, she thought there should be something similar for police to access wherever a child is abducted.

Around that time, Gov. Rudy Perpich asked Patty to serve on a task force examining the problem of child abduction and exploitation in Minnesota. Cordelia Anderson, an expert on child sexual abuse prevention, was appointed to the same task force and remembers feeling amazed at how Wetterling was able to separate her emotion from public policy decisions.

"Despite the extreme characteristics of Jacob's case, which play into the scariest stereotype and are very, very rare, she somehow quickly went to trying to educate herself," Anderson says.

Half a dozen states already had sex offender registries, and in accordance with one of the task force's recommendations, Wetterling helped craft legislation that would implement one in Minnesota based on what was working elsewhere. Accessible only to law enforcement, it would carefully distinguish between offenders based on the number of offenses, victim's age, degree of violence, and amenability to treatment. It wasn't long after the state law passed in 1991 that Wetterling turned her sights on implementing something similar on the federal level, with powerful allies including former U.S. Sen. David Durenberger.

Senator Durenberger was from St. Cloud, four miles from where the Wetterlings lived, so the abduction had struck close to home for him. It was a matter of days after hearing about it on the news that he had driven over to meet the family for the first time and offer whatever help he could.

"There's nothing like coming into the middle of a tragedy that doesn't have an easy answer," he recalled. "Everybody is going, 'What can we do?'"

Durenberger stayed in contact with the family, dropping by every so often to slip a supportive note in their mailbox, and he eventually led the effort to pass federal legislation requiring every state to maintain a sex offender registry accessible to law enforcement, and to regularly verify offenders' addresses for 10 years to life depending on the severity of their crimes.
- The online registry is nothing more than an online vigilante phone book that many have used to target ex-offenders, or their families, for harassment or worse, and is why the online registry needs to be taken offline and used by police only!


Although Durenberger was out of the Senate when the law finally passed in 1994, he regarded it as a victory.

"Patty started the movement," Durenberger says. "Just a few people had the nerve to get out ahead of the problem and try to come up with a solution that could apply across the country. This was happening one kid at a time, one family at a time. If it had a potential preventable cause, than we ought to deal with it legislatively if we could. That was the imperative."
- As Rahm Emanuel once put it, "You never want to let a good crisis go to waste!" And this is exactly what many politicians do to help them look good to the sheeple of the country.


At the time, registration wasn't seen as a panacea for the problem of sexual abuse, nor a scarlet letter to be pinned on all sex offenders. As far as Wetterling was concerned, the registry was just something that would make it easier for the police to locate former offenders.

"I think [she] intended for registration to fill a gap in public safety," Anderson says. "The whole movement to register juveniles or to lump all who commit any kind of offense into something they can never in their lifetime shake was not the intent. I don't think anybody foresaw that it would turn into what it's become."



In 2008, Wetterling received a missive in the mail. "My name is Ricky and I'm a 19-year-old Registered Sex Offender," it began:

"One night, when I was only 16, I met a girl at a teen club who told me she was almost 16, and we hit it off. She and I dated for a few weeks, but because of some issues at home, she ran away. The friend she was staying with told her to tell the police we had sex, and that she was too scared to go home because she was pregnant. When questioned by the police, I told the truth, I said "yes we had sex twice." The police informed me she was only 13. I was charged with two felony counts of Sexual Abuse 3rd degree and tried as an adult. Now because of the laws regarding the age of consent I am a Registered Sex Offender. Things for me, as well as my family, have changed dramatically and our lives have been shattered."


Wetterling was dumbfounded. She had never imagined her idea being used against someone like this.

"It just makes no sense to me," she says. "The design of the law was not to punish kids for being kids. He thought she was 16, and she lied."
- And yet that is exactly what it's doing!

Wetterling found herself questioning not only cases of juvenile sex offenders like Ricky, but also adults who had clearly committed harm but still didn't seem to warrant the kind of permanent pariah status that registration conferred.

One woman contacted Wetterling to share the story of her husband, a former alcohol abuser who had committed a sex crime when he was 19. He went to jail and afterward turned his life around, getting married and having two kids. The Adam Walsh Act retroactively forced him to register as a sex offender, ushering him into a deep depression. He could no longer sit with his own family at church or chaperone school field trips due to the law's provisions.

Wetterling also met a biochemist and college professor who had been caught molesting his stepdaughter. In addition to his prison sentence, he successfully completed treatment as well as a reunification program with his family and was judged rehabilitated by those who knew him. Yet the unforgiving rules of his status as a registered sex offender eventually pushed him into unemployment, homelessness, and a rootless life at the fringe of society.

She kept coming back to the same nagging feeling: These men were not the same as the man who abducted Jacob. These were not serial child abusers who had no capacity to change, and in a terrible twist, their status as sex offenders might actually make children less safe instead of more. Clogging the registries with so many people who don't represent a real ongoing threat could make it harder to discern those who actually do. Moreover, by perpetuating the stranger-danger myth, the laws could be lulling parents into a false sense of security, blinding them to the much more likely threat of sexual abuse by family and friends. Wetterling started feeling that sex offender laws had simply gone too far.

WARNING: ADULT LANGUAGE!

"We've caught a lot of people in the net who could have been helped," she says. "We've been elevating sex offender registration and community notification and punishment for 20-some years, and a wise and prudent thing would be to take a look at what's working. Instead we let our anger drive us."

To those who support the expansion of sex offender laws, Wetterling's concern for offenders can seem naive and misguided. After his daughter's rape and murder, Marc Klaas became a vocal supporter of stiffer penalties and stricter post-prison monitoring of offenders. He founded an organization, KlaasKids, whose mission is "to protect America's children from the predators who lurk in our shadows," according to its website, and endorses both Megan's Law and the Adam Walsh Act.
- And how many children has his organization saved?

"My feelings for Patty are very warm, but I think she's wrong," Klaas says. "I don't think the system is out to punish innocent people. These are people who've existed in anonymity for thousands of years and now we're finding out who they are, and they're whining about it."
- Because you are blinded by your hate and anger, of course you will disagree with her.  What if your own son was slapped with the sex offender label?

Wetterling is quick to say that she still supports registries as a law enforcement tool and believes in civil commitment for some offenders who are truly too dangerous to live in society. Yet she has a fundamental disagreement with the other victims' families.

"We just view the problem differently," she says. "I have a tremendous amount of respect for what John and Reve Walsh have done, and I used to sit down with Marc Klaas to have a drink or six. We've undergone a shared experience, and I'm never going to tell a parent the way they're dealing with it is wrong or the way I'm dealing with it is right. I just think some of this really angry, punitive stuff is letting the bad guys win. They're building a world that isn't caring and believing in one another. That's not who I am."



Inside a hotel ballroom in downtown Atlanta a few years ago, Wetterling stood at a podium and held a crowd of 1,300 people at rapt attention. She cleared her throat and told the story she's told hundreds of times, the story of Jacob's abduction. She talked about her determination to help prevent child sexual abuse, not just punish it, and about her resistance to simplistic solutions to a complicated problem.

Among those listening to her address the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, a national organization dedicated to preventing sexual abuse, was Joan Tabachnick, a co-chair of the organization's prevention committee.

"I think almost everybody in that audience was in tears because of the vulnerability she's able to show, speaking about the horrific experience she's had, as well as how she's translated that into public policy," Tabachnick recalls. "It's amazingly courageous to ask what can we do to prevent this given that there are so many other parents who don't want anything to do with what she's saying."

Wetterling approaches the issue of sexual abuse prevention with the same sense of complexity and nuance that she brings to her understanding of who sex offenders are. To help keep them from reoffending, she believes we need to aid their success with housing, employment, counseling, and social support, all of which the current system does much to dissuade.

"There's a whole bunch else that needs to happen," Wetterling says. "We can't just keep locking them up, putting satellite monitoring on them, registering them for life. That doesn't change the problem."

Wetterling is also focused on primary prevention — that is, stopping abuse from happening in the first place. It's a bitter irony that almost all our public funds are funneled into punishing known sex offenders and virtually none are aimed at preventing sexual abuse from happening in the first place. Waiting until a child is harmed, hoping to find out about it, and then reacting with vengeance might satisfy the public's bloodlust and win points for politicians, but it's not a strategy that actually protects kids.
- What about educating the kids in schools about sexual abuse, and parents as well?  I don't see many people talking about that, except maybe Erin Merryn.

Yet a growing number of clinicians, researchers, activists, and public health officials are turning their focus to primary prevention, which means examining risk factors, protective factors, and even the neurological origin of why some adults may be sexually drawn to children.
- This has been around since the dawn of time.  People have weird fantasies!  Just like those who are into S&M, bondage, homosexuality, etc.

For Wetterling, primary prevention also means taking a broad, holistic view of what's happening in our culture. She rues the effects of a porn-soaked, over-sexualized culture on young people and espouses teaching children about healthy relationships and appropriate behavior starting at an early age.

It's a testament to her preternatural faith in the power of prevention that she sees even her own son's abductor as someone whose vile behavior might have been averted. In 1999, on the 10th anniversary of Jacob's disappearance, Patty wrote an open letter to his kidnapper:

"I have found some comfort picturing you not as a mean old, ugly, bad guy, but at one time, you were an eleven year old boy," she wrote. "Someone's son...possibly someone's brother needing and hopefully sharing the love an 11-year-old boy deserves. If this love wasn't shared in your family, I'm sorry. Every child is entitled to the love and caring that family and friends provide."

She kept a list of questions she was desperate to ask next to the phone in case the abductor called: Why did you do it? Why Jacob? Where is he? But he never called.

Wetterling still harbors hope that Jacob is alive and will return to her someday. In the meantime, she spends her life thinking about what can be done to help children right now — those who might be victimized, as well as those who might grow up to become victimizers someday.

"We can spend the rest of our years talking about how to manage sex offenders," she says. "But wouldn't it be better if we could quit growing them? That's the bigger problem."


Sunday, March 17, 2013

PA - Adam Walsh Act

The following was sent to us via the contact form and posted with the users permission. The name has been abbreviated for their own protection.

By Robert:
Hello, I'm a RSO (Registered Sex Offender) and a regular visitor of this site. I recently had my registration period changed from a 10 year plea bargain to a tier III offender under AWA (Wikipedia). I noticed on the state registry 90 percent were listed as tier III. I had brought up the fact I was really bothered being a tier III in sex offender treatment class and having to register every three months for the rest of my life when my plea bargain clearly stated 10 year Megan's law (Wikipedia), and the counselor's who are female's told me "it was what I deserved because I had caused my victim a lifetime of pain"! And I have to sit there and take it or they can find a reason to unsuccessfully discharge me from the mandated program and that would violate my probation. I took a nolo contendere (Wikipedia) plea and can't even maintain my innocence as I would be discharged from the treatment program for denial. My charges are misdemeanor's and since I have two of them I'm a tier III offender automatically based on that alone, not on the risk level I impose on the community, although the community sees me as a high risk worst of the worst offenders now. There is no logic or justice in any of the sex offender laws in this country and we need to change them. I recently joined my local chapter of RSOL PA and plan to advocate for changes in these laws, not so much for my sake as for my family's I have kids who are very affected by the registry. Please any direction or advice you could give me on advocating would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Robert


Jurisdictions Face Challenges to Implementing the Act, and Stakeholders Report Positive and Negative Effects

The following was sent to us via the contact form and posted with the users permission. The name has been abbreviated for their own protection.

By RF:
An eye opening "study" by GAO. Reveals the overall failure of implementating the AWA across the entire country. Most interesting here is the fact that "SORNA, when passed in 2006, required DOJ to conduct a comprehensive study on SORNA’s effects, which could help address current research gaps." But DOJ cites no funding for the study. DOJ has money, even unclaimed Byrne JAG funds from states that have not implemented SORNA, available to implement more SORNA programs BUT NO MONEY TO GATHER FACTS ON THE EFFECTS OF SORNA ONCE IMPLEMENTED!


Original Article (PDF)

What GAO Found
The Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART Office) within the Department of Justice (DOJ) has determined that 19 of the 37 jurisdictions that have submitted packages for review have substantially implemented the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). Although the SMART Office has determined that 17 of the jurisdictions that submitted packages have not yet substantially implemented SORNA, the office concluded that 15 of these 17 jurisdictions have implemented at least half of the SORNA requirements; the office has not yet made a determination for 1 jurisdiction that submitted a package. A majority of nonimplemented jurisdictions reported that generating the political will to incorporate the necessary changes to their state laws and related policies or reconciling legal conflicts are among the greatest challenges to implementation. For example, officials from 27 nonimplemented jurisdictions reported reconciling conflicts between SORNA and state laws--such as which offenses should require registration--as a challenge to implementing SORNA. Officials from 5 of 18 jurisdictions that responded to a survey question asking how DOJ could help address these challenges reported that the SMART Office could provide greater flexibilities; however, SMART Office officials said they have offered as many flexibilities as possible and further changes would take legislative action.

A few studies have been conducted on the effects of certain SORNA requirements on jurisdictions and registered sex offenders, but GAO did not find any that evaluated the effects on public safety following SORNA implementation; stakeholders reported both positive and negative effects as a result of implementing the law. Officials from 4 of 12 implementing jurisdictions who responded to the survey reported that one benefit was improved monitoring of registered sex offenders. Stakeholders also reported that SORNA resulted in enhanced information sharing on registered sex offenders between criminal justice components, in part through the use of certain databases that enable jurisdictions to share information with one another. Stakeholders and survey respondents also identified negative or unintended consequences of implementing SORNA. For example, officials from three of five state agencies and all eight of the local law enforcement agencies GAO interviewed stated that their workload has increased, in part because of the increased frequency at which sex offenders must update their registration information as a result of the act. Officials from a majority of the public defender and probation offices also said that SORNA implementation has made it more difficult for registered sex offenders to obtain housing and employment, which can negatively affect their ability to reintegrate into their communities. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is statutorily required to study SORNA's effectiveness in increasing compliance with requirements and the effect of these requirements on increasing public safety. As of December 2012, DOJ had not requested the funding to conduct this study and the funding had not been appropriated. NIJ officials stated that NIJ does not proactively request funding for specific studies, but waits for Congress to decide when to appropriate the funding. Neither DOJ nor the Administrative Office of the United States Courts provided written comments on this report.

Why GAO Did This Study
Studies estimate that about 1 in every 5 girls and 1 in every 7 to 10 boys are sexually abused. In 2006, Congress passed SORNA, which introduced new sex offender registration standards for all 50 states, 5 U.S. territories (American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands), the District of Columbia, and certain Indian tribes. SORNA established the SMART Office to determine if these jurisdictions have "substantially implemented" the law, and to assist them in doing so. The deadline to implement SORNA was July 2009; given that none of the jurisdictions met this deadline, DOJ authorized two 1-year extensions. This report addresses: (1) To what extent has the SMART Office determined that jurisdictions have substantially implemented SORNA, and what challenges, if any, have jurisdictions faced? (2) For jurisdictions that have substantially implemented SORNA, what are the reported effects that the act has had on public safety, criminal justice stakeholders, and registered sex offenders?

GAO analyzed SMART Office implementation status reports from September 2009 through September 2012. To identify any challenges, GAO surveyed officials in the 50 states, 5 U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia; GAO received responses from 93 percent (52 of 56) of them. The survey results can be viewed at GAO-13-234SP GAO visited or interviewed criminal justice officials in five jurisdictions that have substantially implemented SORNA, chosen to represent a range in the number of registered sex offenders per 100,000 residents. Their perspectives are not generalizable, but provided insights.

For more information, contact Eileen R. Larence at (202) 512-8777 or larencee@gao.gov.


Tuesday, January 29, 2013

MI - Michigan may expand online sex offender registry to include more crimes involving minors

Original Article

01/29/2013

By Jonathan Oosting

LANSING - More sex offenders may soon be popping up on Michigan's online registry.

The state Senate today unanimously approved a bill that would expand the online registry to include certain additional crimes involving minors.

Lawmakers previously overhauled the Michigan Sex Offender Registry Act in 2011 to come into compliance with the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, which required the state to separate sex offenders into three tiers and mandated specific reporting requirements for each.

Under current law, the Michigan State Police must post online registry data for all Tier II and Tier III offenders convicted of crimes such as rape or creation of child pornography.

Senate Bill 44 (PDF), now headed to the House for consideration, would also require the state to post data for Tier I offenders convicted of a single crime involving minors.

Specific offenses that would be added to the website include knowingly possessing child pornography, indecent exposure when the victim is a minor, unlawful imprisonment or restraint of a minor and surveillance of a minor who is undressed or wearing only undergarments in a situation where he or she has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

"It was brought to my attention that there are some people in Tier I who could be a danger to children," said Sen. Rick Jones, R-Grand Ledge, who sponsored the legislation. "Certainly somebody that has committed one of these acts and been convicted should be on the list so parents and grandparents can protect their children from somebody who happens to be in the area."

Jones introduced a similar bill last session. It too was approved by the state Senate, but it failed to see a vote in the House during a busy lame-duck session. Citing today's unanimous Senate vote, Jones said he expects his bill to reach the governor's desk this time around.


Monday, January 14, 2013

PETITION - Abolish the Public Sex Offender Registry. It is harmful to families and children

Sign the petition here

Not everyone who is on the Public Sex Offender Registry has molested a child or raped someone.

People deserve a second chance. Being on the registry gives NO SECOND CHANCE.

The National Public Sex Offender Registry, Sex Offender Registration Notification Act, (SORNA) and the Adam Walsh Act are counterproductive to the safety of families and children in society.

The Public Sex Offender Registry so stigmatizes all who are placed upon it that they cannot: Secure Employment, Secure Housing, nor Protect their innocent children from being traumatized by the stigma.

It has also create vigilantism toward the individual, their family members, and their children on the registry. It does not protect anyone and the recidivism rate is is less than 5%.


Tuesday, January 1, 2013

PA - Pennsylvania ups the ante on sexual offender registration

Original Article

01/01/2013

By STEVE MCCONNELL

Stricter measures targeting sexual offenders in Pennsylvania recently went into effect as part of a final push to comply with a federal law named in memory of Adam Walsh, a murdered 6-year-old boy whose father became a fierce advocate for child abuse prevention laws.

In late December, Pennsylvania became one of several states to adhere to the requirements of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act, federal legislation named after the son of "America's Most Wanted" host John Walsh.
- It has never been proven who did the crime or if sexual assault was even involved.  So why are they punishing all ex-sex offenders and not everybody who harms children?  Do we punish all people who run stop signs for what some murderer did?  No, of course not, so why are we punishing ex-sex offenders for the MURDER of a child?

Enacted in 2006 (Video), the legislation built upon previous federal laws that mainly required convicted sex offenders to register their personal information in publicly accessible state databases tracking their whereabouts so that communities can feel safer knowing who they are and where they live.
- Exactly, it punishes ex-sex offenders, who had nothing to do with Adam's death.  That is like punishing all DUI offenders for what Charles Mansion did, or brainwashed people to do.  If they wanted to "protect" children from all abuse, then all people who abused children would be required to report where they live and all their personal info on the online shaming hit-list, and the registry would not be called the "sex offender" registry, but the "child abuse" registry.  So it's apparently not to "protect" children from abuse, but to punish ex-sex offenders, the scapegoats for all crimes involving children!

The Adam Walsh Act took further steps to eliminate a patchwork of state sex offender registration laws - commonly known as Megan's laws - to establish baseline requirements.

In Pennsylvania, state and local officials had been working to comply with the law by Dec. 20. They say they've met the deadline.

"It's a huge change, and it's definitely having a lot of impact," said state police Cpl. Steve Vesnaver of the agency's Megan's Law division.

Among the changes, convicted sex offenders must register immediately after they are sentenced by a judge. Before, they registered after fully serving out their sentence or after they were released from prison.

In Lackawanna County, convicted sexual offenders will be registered within 48 hours of sentencing at the county courthouse in Scranton, Assistant District Attorney Patricia Lafferty said.

"It's just to make sure everybody gets right into the system," she said.

In the county, four registration sites are now ready to go, including at the state police barracks in Dunmore and the Scranton Police Department, Ms. Lafferty said, which have been loaded with new software to better link with the national sex offender database maintained by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Also, offenders classified as the most sexually violent must stop by a law enforcement agency four times a year to check in and confirm their information - such as most recent address, and their photo - is up-to-date.

Of the roughly 12,200 sexual offenders currently registered in the state's database, about 85 percent will have to fulfill that requirement, Cpl. Vesnaver said.

Before, sexual offenders in that category reported once a year, although they always had to quickly provide changes to their personal information under previous laws.

The new provisions of the law also require sexual offenders to provide more information about their personal life than before, including the address of where they work and the make and model of any vehicle they drive.

Officials hope the tougher reporting measures prevent the database from being riddled with outdated information, in effect defeating its purpose. Failure to register is a felony offense.

Lastly, the changes require sexual offenders to be registered for longer periods of time, depending on the severity of the crime.


Sunday, December 30, 2012

Why do states charge for criminal background checks, but the sex offender registry is free?

Someone brought this issue up in another group, and it's a good question.

We all know most states charge you a small fee to get someone's criminal history, yet using the online sex offender registry is free?

Enforcing the sex offender laws costs a ton of money, so why not start charging people to use them? Then you could use that money to help pay for the costly laws!

Many of the sites who do background checks, charge a fee, and many, if not all, sign you up for a monthly deduction from your checking account, which most people are not aware of.

So when are they going to start charging people to access the sex offender registry? If it's going to be free, then other criminal records should also be free.

We have a right to know, right?

P.S.: Also, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act is suppose to be about "Child Protection," which would include abusive parents, kidnapping, gangs who initiate children, drug dealers who sell to children, DUI offenders who hit or kill a child, and many more crimes... So why do we put only sex crimes on the list, even if it doesn't involve a child? If it's a "child protection" law, then why don't we put all people who have harmed children in some form on the online registry and rename it to the "child protection registry" so it's more accurate and goes along with the title of the law? Just saying!


Tuesday, December 25, 2012

PA - In Adopting Punitive Sex Offender Law, Pennsylvania Takes Giant Step Backward in Protecting Children

Original Article

12/20/2012

Today is a dark day for Pennsylvania’s children. After spending the last two years enacting a series of measures to improve how we treat our children, Pennsylvania took a giant step backward in adopting a punitive and unreasonable law incorrectly stigmatizing youth for life. Act 111, which goes into effect today, unnecessarily places certain juveniles on a lifetime sex offender registry.

Act 111 was enacted in response to the federal Adam Walsh Act, passed by Congress in 2006 (Video) after the high-profile abduction and murder of a child. States that do not comply with the Act are at risk of losing 10% of their funding under the Justice Assistance Grant program. The Act expanded the breadth of registration and notification laws for all individuals convicted of sex offenses. Most importantly, it subjects youth who are adjudicated delinquent to the same registration requirements as convicted adult sex offenders.
- Isn't using money to get someone to comply with your wishes, bribery?

The law casts a wide net, bringing into its reach children who do not in any way represent the adult child-predators it is intended to address. The law does little to improve public safety and ignores Supreme Court jurisprudence on treating juveniles differently. It disregards established literature on adolescent development. It mistakenly assumes that juvenile sex offenses belong in the same category as that of adults.
- The laws in general do not do what they intended, they sweep all ex-sex offenders into the "predator" group, and we all know that not all ex-sex offenders are predators, but that is what they are doing and they continually use the terms "predator," "pedophile," etc as if all ex-sex offenders are all the same.

It is well documented that juvenile offending—especially sex offending—is inherently different from that of adults. There is no empirical relationship between juvenile sex crimes and adult sex crimes. Juvenile sex offending does not predict adult sex offending. Over 92% of all individuals who committed a sex offense as a juvenile do not commit another sex offense. Kids tend to mature out of sexual offending behavior and are not likely to commit another sexual offense. Federal requirements in the Adam Walsh Act do not have a significant influence on recidivism rates.
- Not really!  Adults and children have a low recidivism rate.

Moreover, data overwhelmingly show that subjecting juveniles to long-term registration and notification policies does nothing to improve community safety, but does create unintended harmful effects on the youth themselves. Numerous critics, including law enforcement officials, have observed the unintended and punitive consequences that result when youth are enveloped in a law enforcement program designed for adults convicted of sexual offenses.
- The same can be said for adults, the laws do nothing to improve safety.

For those reasons, a number of states have rejected the Act’s funding incentives and excluded juveniles from their sex offender registries. These states have accepted the common-sense view that children are different and thus require different treatment under the law. Other states have taken measures to lessen the punitive effect of the law, while still remaining in compliance with the federal mandates; they hold that juveniles cannot be placed on a registry until after they have completed their rehabilitation in the juvenile justice system and the court holds a hearing to determine whether registration is necessary to protect the public interest.

The law that Pennsylvania adopted to comply with the Adam Walsh Act, however, requires registration by juveniles age 14 and older who are adjudicated delinquent for rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, aggravated indecent assault, or the conspiracy or attempt to commit one of those offenses, and who live, work or attend school in Pennsylvania. These youth must register for life on a non-public sex offender registry. The law has reporting requirements that are nearly impossible to meet and imposes adult felony convictions on individuals who are unable to comply.

Recently, in Miller v. Alabama, the Supreme Court struck down mandatory lifetime sentences for youth, stating its rationale as inapplicable to juveniles for whom the Constitution requires individualized determinations regarding criminal sanctions. The same rationale applies to so-called juvenile “sex offenders,” as registration is automatic and lasts a lifetime without an individualized determination of its necessity.

The three branches of Pennsylvania government have worked hard to repair the Commonwealth’s tarnished reputation for its treatment of children. However, in adopting Act 111, it harms the life chances of children, without any compelling reason. Kids are different.


Thursday, December 20, 2012

PA - Adam Walsh Act takes effect today

Original Article

12/20/2012

By Jennifer Harr

The registration provisions of the Adam Walsh Act kick in today, requiring additional reporting time for some, and new registration for others.

Signed last year to strengthen the existing Megan’s Law reporting and other requirements for sex offenders, the new act bases how long offenders have to report on a tiered system, adds new offenses for which people must report and in some cases, will require those already sentenced – and not covered under Megan’s Law – to undergo an assessment and being reporting addresses to state police.

Fayette County Assistant District Attorney Linda Cordaro, who acts as the county’s sex assault prosecutor, said there are many changes, all aimed at protecting potential victims. Included among them are a tiered system that puts offenses into three categories.

The lowest reporting time is for the first tier, and is 15 years. That tier includes charges like unlawful restraint of a minor, luring a child to a motor vehicle, indecent assault and interference with custody of children.

Tier two offenses require a 25-year registration, and include institutional sexual assault, promoting prostitution of a minor, sexual abuse of children. Tier three registrants do so for life, and have been convicted of offenses like kidnapping and rape.

Under Megan’s Law, offenses were divided into two categories, requiring either 10-year or lifetime registration.

The 10-year registrants who are still within their registration period will be reclassified under the Adam Walsh Act, and their reporting time will retroactively increase dependent upon what tier they fit into, Cordaro said.

If a person has been convicted or has pleaded guilty to an offense that required registration under Megan’s Law, and are still under the supervision of the court, and they haven’t successfully completed their super or incarceration, then they are going to fall under the requirements of the Adam Walsh registration, which is a lengthier registration period,” she said.

Uniontown attorney Thomas W. Shaffer recently argued a motion to have a client who pleaded no contest to indecent assault removed from probation so that his client was not retroactively forced into registration under the Adam Walsh Act.

The man, sentenced to one year probation in February, was previously not required to register under Megan’s Law, a provision specifically noted in his plea deal, Shaffer said.

However, the man received notice that he was going to have to register under Adam Walsh, a move Shaffer contended is a constitutional violation.

He said that retroactively increasing registration time – or forcing someone to register who previously did not have to – is tantamount to punishing someone twice for the same crime, and precluded.

This act is penal, it’s not procedural,” Shaffer said.



Sunday, December 16, 2012

PA - For young sex offenders, a new Scarlet Letter

Original Article

12/16/2012

By Laurie Mason Schroeder

Young sex offenders will soon face some long-lasting, potentially public consequences under a change in the law that goe‘s into effect this week.

The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) requires teens convicted of serious sex offenses to be registered in a database for 25 years. Previously, only adult sex offenders were registered.

Currently, the online registry can be accessed only by police and other law enforcement agencies. But with the trend of colleges and employers seeking more and more personal information about potential students and employees, juvenile advocates fear that the new law might mark a teen for life.

Others say that’s not such a bad thing.

Certainly there are some juveniles, the predators, that you need to monitor,” said Robert Stanzione, Bucks County’s chief of Juvenile Probation. “I think this legislation was crafted with those individuals in mind.”

SORNA is a portion of the Adam Walsh Child Protection Act, which was signed into law in 2006 (Video). The federal act goes a step beyond Megan’s Law, imposing longer and stricter registration requirements on sex offenders of all ages.

Under SORNA, sex offenders must provide more personal information and make periodic in-person appearances before law enforcement to update that information. It requires sex offenders to keep their registration current in each jurisdiction in which they reside, work or go to school, and increases the amount of information to which the public has access.

SORNA extends beyond the 50 states, requiring registration in most U.S. territories and on American Indian reservations. States that don’t enact SORNA laws lose federal crime-fighting grant money.

Certain juvenile sex offenders, those found delinquent of rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, aggravated indecent assault or conspiracy to any of the above, will now be registered sex offenders for 25 years, even though Juvenile Court supervision ends at age 21.

Stanzione said that fewer than five teens now being supervised by Bucks juvenile probation officers will be required to register. But he worries what will happen as word gets out that an adjudication to a sex offense — the juvenile court equivalent to a conviction — carries a 25-year consequence.

My concerns moving forward is what effect this is going to have on victims,” he said. “We’re going to see more cases where the kid is not going to admit to the crime, so we’ll have to have a hearing and the victims will have to testify. That’s going to be pretty traumatizing, as most of the victims are younger children.”

Lawyer Robert Mancini (Avvo, Facebook), who says juvenile defense accounts for about 30 percent of his practice, said the new law means that he’ll have to advise more young clients to fight their charges.



Tuesday, December 11, 2012

MA - Family Members of Registered Sex Offenders Urge Massachusetts Not to Adopt Federal Adam Walsh Act

Original Article

12/11/2012

By Shana Rowan

USA FAIR, Inc., a national advocacy organization formed by the family members of people required to register with the sex offender registry, today urged the Massachusetts State Legislature not to act on Governor Deval Patrick’s proposal to bring the state into compliance with the federal Adam Walsh Act (AWA).

Many enlightened states, including New York and California, have looked at AWA and rejected it on the basis of sound principles of sex offender management and Massachusetts should continue to do likewise,” said Shana Rowan, Executive Director of USA FAIR.

USA FAIR is very concerned that in the wake of the heinous criminal charges recently brought against [name withheld] that Massachusetts will allow emotion to trump reason and cause the state to adopt legislation that is not supported by volumes of research on sex offender recidivism. The unfortunate history of sex offender legislation in the United States has been to react to rare high profile crimes, while ignoring the fact that sex offenders have one of the lowest recidivism rates in the entire criminal justice system,” said Rowan.

Rowan continued, “If Mr. [name withheld] is found guilty of these horrific crimes then the full force of the law should be brought down upon him. However, the thousands of law-abiding former offenders who live in Massachusetts and are just focusing on rebuilding their lives as good citizens and providers for their families should not be punished for his acts by having new sanctions imposed upon them. Punish the offender, not the entire offender group.”

Rowan continued, “USA FAIR opposes states adopting the Adam Walsh Act for numerous reasons including its discarding of assigning risk levels based on scientific risk assessments in favor of a conviction based tier system. It makes no sense assigning risks based on the conviction, because research has shown that the people who commit the same crime do not pose the same risk of reoffending. The crime is only one of many offender and victim characteristics that need to be evaluated. This is one of the major reasons why the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA), the nation’s largest association representing sex offender treatment professionals, also opposes AWA.” (http://www.atsa.com/pdfs/ppReasonedApproach.pdf)

Rowan cited a recently published November 2012 study conducted in four states (Florida, New Jersey, Minnesota and North Carolina) that found an overall sex crime recidivism rate of 10% after 10 years. The study found that among those who committed a new sex crime, “Actuarial measures and existing state tiering systems both showed better predictive validity than AWA tiers.” Referencing the [name withheld] case, Rowan added, “The state tiering system is working better than AWA. You don’t scrap a system that works because a Level 1 offender committed heinous crimes. Low risk was never meant to mean no risk.” (http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/240099.pdf)

USA FAIR also strongly opposes Governor Patrick’s call to place more registrants on the public website. “Listing on the public website can be a life-destroying event. Experience has shown in other states that have expanded its public registry that many law abiding offenders who have lived offense-free in the community for years and even decades have lost jobs and even been forced to move following public disclosure. Such actions not only impact former offenders, but their family members as well who suffer the collateral consequences of the registry. Listing on the website should be reserved only for those who have been deemed truly dangerous.”

Rowan concluded, “We fully understand the emotional appeal of the “if it just saves one child” argument, but basing public policy on the rare heinous crime committed by one registered sex offender, while ignoring the extensive research of the entire former sex offender population, does not result in a fair and reasoned criminal justice system. The Massachusetts Legislature should consider the Governor’s proposal in a deliberative manner and avoid rushing to judgement in a climate of sex offender panic.”


Monday, December 10, 2012

OH - Ohio court's sex offender ruling clarifies some laws

Original Article

So when is the sex offender moral panic and witch hunt going to stop? Every single year politicians are passing more and more laws to further punish, demonize, exile and ostracize ex-sex offenders, been doing it for many years now, and wasting tons and tons of tax payer money, and we wonder why we are about to jump off the cliff?

12/10/2012

By Jona Ison

CHILLICOTHE — Recent Supreme Court decisions likely will result in some changes to past classifications and sentences for sex offenders.

The decisions were released along with several other Ohio Supreme Court decisions as part of a year-end transition process. The decisions clarify some issues regarding the changeover from Megan’s Law to the Adam Walsh Act regarding sentencing and classifications of sex offenders.

In one case, the court’s decision clarified that any sex offense committed between the July 2007 repeal of Megan’s Law and the January 2008 effective date of the Adam Walsh Act shall be classified under Megan’s Law. An earlier ruling by the court had determined the law under which offenders are classified is determined by when the act was committed, not when the conviction occurs.

In a different case, the court ruled that when offenders are classified under Megan’s Law and violate address notification rules under that law, the offender must be sentenced under the penalty provisions of Megan’s Law, not the Adam Walsh Act.

However, another case ruling determined any indictments charging a violation of notification requirements of the Adam Walsh Act of offenders classified under Megan’s Law continue to be valid. The court reasoned the indictments were valid because the two laws have identical address change notification requirements.

Ross County Prosecutor Matt Schmidt said the rulings “seem consistent” with past rulings. As the state moved from Megan’s Law to Adam Walsh, there was a flurry of changes back and forth.

It’s created a massive headache,” Schmidt said.

At first, all offenders were re-classified under the Adam Walsh Act (which carries a three-tier classification), but then a court ruling determined that was unconstitutional. As a result, those offenders had to be reverted back to classification under Megan’s Law.

The Megan’s Law classification system requires a sexual classification hearing and the judge determines the classification of the offender, such as sexual predator.

The new rulings, however are unlikely to create such a large issue.

Pike County Prosecutor Rob Junk (Facebook) anticipates his office will see some motions filed on past cases, but not an overwhelming amount.

I’ll imagine we’ll see a few,” Junk said.

Cases where any of the issues are present will not automatically be altered. Defendants will need to file a motion for a change.

It’s not our jobs to hunt them down and inform them of the changes in the law,” Junk said.

Sex offenders seeking more information about the rulings and how to file something in their case can contact their individual attorneys or the Office of the Ohio Public Defender at 800-686-1573 or visit www.opd.ohio.gov.


Sunday, December 2, 2012

FL - New study finds federal sex offender law not effective

Original Article

11/28/2012

By Jill Levenson

New data driven system called for in new report

According to a report released last week (PDF) by the U.S. Department of Justice, the federal tier-based sex offender registration and management system put in place in 2006 does not predict risk of recidivism by sex offenders and its authors point to the need for a system based on more empirical data.

Title 1 of the Adam Walsh Act (called SORNA – Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act), passed by Congress in 2006, sought to improve and standardize sex offender registration and management procedures by requiring all states to implement the same three-tier classification system according to the offense of conviction—Tier 1 being the least serious and Tier 3 being the most serious. The system assumed that the more serious the offense the higher the risk of a repeated crime by the offender.

"The offense-based classification system adopted by the Adam Walsh Act was developed without empirical validation," said Jill Levenson, an associate professor of human services in Lynn University's College of Liberal Education and one of the researchers on the project. "Therefore the essential question is whether this classification system accurately represents the risk of re-offense and leads to more effective sex offender management."

The study (PDF), funded by the National Institute of Justice, collected data about 1,789 adult male sex offenders released from prisons in Florida, Minnesota, New Jersey and South Carolina. The sex offenders were tracked for up to 10 years. After 5 years, 5.1 percent of them had been rearrested for a new sexual crime, and after 10 years, the sexual rearrest rate was 10.2 percent.

Tier level was not significantly associated with recidivism in New Jersey, Minnesota and South Carolina and was inversely associated with recidivism in Florida (PDF)—the only state in the study's sample that has been certified as substantially compliant with the federal Adam Walsh Act.

"We investigated whether SORNA tiers were correlated with risk assessments and recidivism rates. If SORNA designations correctly identify higher risk offenders, then we would expect cases with Tier 3 offenders to have higher risk scores and higher rates of recidivism," explained Levenson. "What we found, however, was that Tier 3 offenders were consistently associated with lower risk scores and lower recidivism rates."

The researchers concluded that actuarial risk assessment instruments, which are created by putting together risk factors found by research to correlate with reoffending, consistently outperformed the tier system mandated by federal law. The tiering systems already in use by the states also did a better job than SORNA tiers in predicting which sex offenders will go on to be rearrested for a new sex crime.

States that fail to comply with the law are penalized with a reduction in their federal criminal justice funding. So far, only 16 states have passed legislation complying with the federal requirements.

"The findings call into question the accuracy and utility of the federal classification system in detecting high-risk sex offenders and applying concordant risk management strategies," said Levenson. "If decision-making is to be driven by assigning offenders into defined risk classes, those categories must be determined by empirically-derived procedures so that they are more likely to correctly identify higher risk offenders. The public needs to be able to tell who poses the greatest threat to the community, and we need to make sure our limited resources are targeted toward those most likely to reoffend."

The team of researchers was led by Kristen Zgoba, director of research at the New Jersey Department of Corrections, and Michael Miner, a professor in human sexuality at University of Minnesota. The team also included Ray Knight of Brandeis University, Elizabeth Letourneau of Johns Hopkins, and David Thornton, who runs the Sand Ridge secure sex offender treatment center in Wisconsin. Read the full report online (PDF).


More on Levenson

Jill Levenson is an associate professor of human services at Lynn University and a licensed clinical social worker with over 20 years of experience treating sexual abuse victims, survivors, perpetrators and non-offending parents. Her academic focus is on sexual abuse and how offenders are categorized and treated.

Levenson is a nationally known expert on sexual violence and has become a respected authority on, among other things, laws aimed at protecting children while punishing, tracking and rehabilitating sex offenders. She has been quoted in national publications including the Associated Press, The Wall Street Journal and Newsweek, among others. She has published over 60 articles about sex crime policy and offender treatment.


Monday, November 26, 2012

DC - Feds overstep in key effort

Original Article

11/24/2012

Congress started out a few years ago with a good idea: Set up a nationwide listing of sex offenders so it would be possible to know when dangerous offenders moved across state lines.

But Congress overreached. The final form of that legislation was heavy-handed, imposing rigid requirements on the states.

The Adam Walsh Act, passed in 2006 (Video), required states to adopt a uniform registry that includes all sex offenders regardless of the seriousness of their crimes. To get the registry up and running, states in most cases were to purchase new computer technology and devote increased law enforcement hours to processing offenders according to federal rules. States were given five years to comply.

Certainly, society has a crucial responsibility to punish sex crimes and protect citizens from offenders. Sex offenders now are the largest group of prisoners in Nebraska’s correctional institutions, overtaking drug dealers and drug users in total numbers.
- Society has a responsibility to punish all crime and all criminals the same, not single out one specific group because they are each to target, that is the basis of corruption and exploitation.

But the approach taken by Congress has turned out to be a case where tough-sounding legislation was nearly unworkable. Congress imposed an impractical, unfunded mandate on already burdened state governments.

The law has been so overreaching and costly that 34 states have fallen short in implementing its provisions. Some say they will decline to go along with the law even though that means that means losing 10 percent of their federal criminal justice funding.
- Which, by the way, could be extortion or bribery, which is a crime.

In Texas, a study showed the state would lose $1.4 million annually as a penalty for non-compliance. But that was a pittance compared with projected costs of compliance: $39 million.

Ohio was the first state to become compliant. As it turned out, in the first two years of operation Ohio spent $10 million alone in defending itself against lawsuits from offenders sentenced to the registry. Had Ohio continued with its previous state-run approach, the penalty costs from the feds over the same period would have been about $2 million.

Iowa is among the 34 states falling short, suffering a $200,000 penalty. Last spring, Nebraska received word that the feds considered the state’s efforts to conform to the federal law insufficient.