PA - Bucks lawmaker wants broader community notification for registered sex offenders

Frank Farry

Original Article

05/07/2013

By Jo Ciavaglia

A Bucks County lawmaker wants the state’s sexual offender community notification law broadened to include where registered sexually violent predators work and receive behavior health treatment.

Rep. Frank Farry, R-142, on Tuesday said he plans to speak with the executive director of the House judiciary staff to look at what options are available to give local communities more ability to regulate where sex offender treatment centers are located.

“Obviously you don’t want it in proximity to residential areas or places where children congregate,” he said, adding he doesn’t have a timeline for introducing a bill.

Farry’s district includes Hulmeville, where residents recently learned about the existence of an outpatient center that treats sex offenders, including sexually violent predators. The center, Resources for Human Development, had been operating for a year without the knowledge of local officials or police or a use and occupancy permit.

Megan’s Law gives states the discretion to establish criteria for community disclosure, but they are compelled to make private and personal information on registered sex offenders publicly available.

Pennsylvania has no restrictions on where centers that treat sex offenders or sexually violent predators can be located.

The state’s Megan’s Law website lists the home and employer addresses of all registered sex offenders and sexually violent predators, but community notification is required only where a sexually violent predator or sexually violent delinquent child lives.

At a minimum, Farry said, outpatient centers treating sexual offenders should be required to notify local police and government officials that they are conducting business in a community. He plans to investigate whether other states have enacted broader public notification or distance provisions for sex offender treatment centers.

Pennsylvania has 403 registered sexually violent predators on parole or probation, according to the Megan’s Law website, which is maintained by Pennsylvania State Police. Five are registered as living in Bucks County including one incarcerated at Bucks County prison; Montgomery County has 28 registered SVPs (as they are known), including 17 who are inmates at Graterford prison.

Resources for Human Development is one of four behavioral health providers in Bucks County with state certification to treat individuals deemed sexually violent predators, according to the Pennsylvania Sexual Offenders Assessment Board, which licenses the centers.

Hulmeville council members on Monday said that RHD’s director claims no sexually violent predators are currently in treatment at its Reetz Avenue office. The center treats other individuals with deviant sexual behavior, including convicted sexual offenders.

RHD also provides other human and behavioral services, including programs for recovering substance abusers, the homeless and people with intellectual disabilities. It operates other treatment centers for people with “problematic sexual behaviors and family abuse” in Montgomery County and Philadelphia, and referral sources include probation and parole offices.

The newspaper was unsuccessful Tuesday in reaching Meghan Dade, executive director of the state’s Sexual Offenders Assessment Board.

Pennsylvania defines a sexually violent predator as a sexual offender who has been determined by the court, after evaluation by the Sexual Offenders Assessment Board, to have a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes the person likely to engage in predatory sexually violent offenses.

Under the law, SVPs, once released from prison, are required to attend monthly outpatient counseling sessions for the rest of their lives in a program approved by the state assessment board.

---

MO - Missouri Bill Notifies Prosecutor If Sex Offender Freed

Original Article

05/02/2013

JEFFERSON CITY (AP) – The Missouri Legislature has sent Gov. Jay Nixon a bill that would notify local prosecutors when a sexually violent offender has been conditionally released from treatment.

The Missouri House and Senate both voted Wednesday to pass the bill (SB188, PDF)

Current law only requires the attorney general, the director of the Mental Health Department, the facility housing the offender and the court committing the person to be notified of a release. The legislation would now add the prosecutor in the location where the offender was committed for treatment to be alerted.

The measure would also allow local law enforcement to access information from the Department of Corrections on the released offender’s whereabouts if they are being electronically monitored.

---

WI - Methods for housing, tracking sex offenders under scrutiny

Original Article

We can tell you a good idea, take the sex offender registry offline (or eliminate it) to be used by police only, eliminate the residency restrictions, then most of the problems will not be problems. Crazy, we know, but politicians haven't thought of that idea either, because they don't want to look "soft" on ex-sex offenders who are trying to get on with their lives, yet the very laws they are having issues with, prevent that.

03/27/2013

By Gilman Halsted

State legislators are looking for ways to save money by improving Wisconsin’s system for housing and monitoring released sex offenders.

The joint legislative audit committee plans to investigate the cost of housing released sex offenders and tracking their whereabouts. The audit will also assess the effectiveness of the community notification system that alerts citizens that a sex offender is moving in to a neighborhood.

Don Mogenson of Manitowoc told the committee that in his community, the state is paying exorbitant rent to house offenders and doing a poor job of alerting the public about changes in an offender’s supervision status. He suggested the state put offenders on a farm where they can earn their way back into society: “We need to get these people into a productive life. Then maybe they can make a life for themselves. Walking around and having somebody watch them is not a way to make them productive.”

But the committee chair, Representative Samantha Kerkman, says even rural residents have a “not in my backyard” attitude about having sex offenders as neighbors: “When we have those discussions, even in my rural district, about placement … Even if they're in the middle of a cornfield in a farm, nobody wants them there either.”

Senator Kathleen Vinehout says she hopes the audit will produce solutions that previous legislatures have failed to come up with.

“We have a lot of legislators over the years that have been very concerned about sex offenders and we've added laws on top of laws to try and deal with the problems; but maybe this is a good time for us to look into it in detail and see if we're getting our money's worth.”
- That's your problem!  Adding unconstitutional law upon law to "solve" your problems will do nothing to actually solve your problems, it just creates more.  If you continue to do the same thing, you will continue to get the same outcome.  That is the definition of insanity!

The Department of Corrections has asked for a $2 million increase in sex offender program funding over the next two years.
- See our notes at the top, and you will save millions more!

---

SSRN - On Emotion, Juvenile Sex Offenders, and Mandatory Registration

Original Article

Catherine L. Carpenter
Southwestern Law School

November 10, 2012

3 Journal of Race, Gender, & Policy 1 (2013, Forthcoming)

Abstract:
It is both unremarkable and true that juveniles are different from adults. United States Supreme Court decisions over the past decade have highlighted the extent of the differences. Yet, played out against the backdrop of sex offender registration laws, the conversation takes an abrupt turn. Rather than differentiating between adult and juvenile offenders, federal sex offender registration laws require juveniles convicted of certain sex offenses to face the same onerous registration and notification burdens as their adult counterparts.

Tracking the shift in sex offender registration models from “likely to reoffend” to “conviction-based" assessment, this article argues that “conviction-based” assessment is an unstable proposition when applied to child offenders for two fundamental reasons. First, juvenile offenders lack intentionality and purpose that adult offenders possess, thereby diminishing the value that a conviction carries. Further, and more importantly, studies reveal that the commission of juvenile sex crimes does not portend future predatory behavior, raising the question of the purpose of registration for this class of offenders.

Ultimately, the legislative push to require juvenile sex offenders to suffer serious register and notification burdens demonstrates convincingly the pitfall that impacts the entire debate over sex offender registration. Emotional rhetoric controls the legislative agenda, even in the face of compelling arguments to the contrary.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 14

Keywords: sex offender registration, juvenile sex offender, mandatory registration, SORNA

---

NY - Subway riders may soon be sharing trains with sex offenders

Original Article

Yet another politician trying to make a name for himself, and showing that the laws are about punishment, therefore unconstitutional. See the video at the link above.

03/09/2013

By Ellyn Marks

TIMES SQUARE (PIX11) - Subway stations all over the city, like the one in Times Square, fill their tiled walls with advertisements and art, but will posters of a different nature soon take over? Particularly, the faces of convicted sex offenders.

If one councilman in Queens has his way, Subway passengers will soon be sharing stations with these posters.

Councilman Peter Vallone, Chair of the Public Safety Committee, has proposed to create a wall-of-shame of sorts. The offender’s face will be posted where he or she committed the crime as well as in the neighborhood they live in.

This is enthusiasm!

Vallone sees it as an extension of sex registry and another way to shame sex offenders so they do not attack again.

Critics of the proposal say it’s unconstitutional, but Vallone says former MTA Chairman Joe Lhota, who is now a candidate for mayor, is enthusiastic about featuring mug shots in subway stations.

However, today a spokesperson for the MTA told PIX11′s Ellyn marks that the agency is against the idea because it raises all kinds of issues, including the chance of mistaken identity and vigilantism.

Vallone will introduce the proposal to City Council on Monday.

Video Link

---

SD - South Dakota continues to ignore constitutional rights and grand stands to make themselves look like they are actually doing something!

Marty Jackley

Original Article

01/03/2013

PIERRE - Federal authorities recently certified that South Dakota’s Sex Offender Registration continues to implement the provisions of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). Attorney General Marty Jackley says sex offender registration and community notification are an important part of his office’s work to improve the safety of the state’s citizens. He says in coming years, the state will continue to enforce registry compliance. South Dakota completed the renewal process in November and the Department of Justice has reaffirmed the status.

South Dakota was the fourth registry in the nation to be certified. The compliancy rate in the state is 98.5%. The A.G.’s office says that 3,052 sex offenders reside in the state with just 47 identified instances of non-compliance. State law requires those convicted of sex crimes to register as a sex offender within three business days of coming into any county to live. Sex offenders must re-register every six months. The Attorney General’s office works closely with local law enforcement and prosecutors to update the registry.

Last year, the state entered into agreements with the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe to become registered entities of SORNA. The agreements allow the tribes to maintain their own offender registries and have their sex offender’s data submitted electronically to be included into the South Dakota Sex Offender Registry.

---

The following is the comments we left on the article, which we are sure will be deleted, that is why we are posting them here.

And they continue to ignore their oath of office to defend the Constitutional rights of everybody, including ex-sex offenders, just to help themselves look "tough" on crime while actually doing nothing.

The sex offender registry is nothing more than an online hit-list for vigilantes to use to target ex-sex offenders and their families for harassment, or worse, and it's been known to happen, and is increasing:

http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/09/human-rights-issues.html

The registry doesn't protect anybody or prevent crime, and neither does the residency restrictions, which only force people into exile, homelessness and joblessness.

And if you really wanted to protect children, then, like the Adam Walsh CHILD PROTECTION and Safety Act suggests, you'd put all criminals who harm children on the registry, not just those that include sex of exposure of some form.

Why not have a registry for all criminals so we can all have the right to know where all the criminals live around us? If it saves one child, isn't it worth it?

Or are you just using ex-sex offenders as today's scapegoat, and to help yourselves look "tough" on crime and make money for those who exploit sex, children and criminal records for their own personal gain?

http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/search/label/Offendex

---

NY - LaValle's bill would regulate sex offender notifications

Ken LaValle

Original Article

06/07/2012

By Elana Glowatz

Legislation calls for schools sending out specific information to district parents

Sen. Ken LaValle's bill that would require school districts to dispense information about sex offenders residing locally passed in the state Senate this week.

The legislation received support from nearly all state senators, including John Flanagan (R-East Northport) and Carl Marcellino (R-Syosset). It is still waiting on a vote in the Assembly.

LaValle (R-Port Jefferson) said in a phone interview last Thursday that the bill mandates that a school district, upon receiving information from police about level two and level three offenders registering in the area, specifically include a sex offender's name, picture, address and place of employment in a notification to parents. Districts would be reimbursed for the cost of these notifications, such as mailings.

He wrote the bill because when an offender is in the area, it is "incumbent on the parents to go out and discover who it is basically," the senator said. People who are busy could receive a notification, without specific information, "and they go, 'Yeah, yeah, yeah.' ... It could be someone five doors down."

Currently, school districts have different methods of distributing information.

Roberta Gerold, Middle Country School District superintendent, said the information her district gets from the police includes physical descriptions, aliases, addresses, vehicle descriptions and risk levels. This information is then sent out to people such as the Board of Education, bus drivers and the Selden Centereach Youth Association.

Residents are urged in the district's newsletter to visit the Megan's Law website for detailed information about sex offenders, and are regularly reminded to do so, Gerold said, adding that Middle Country parents are good about seeking out the information.

Mina Evcimen, a clerk in the office of the assistant superintendent for business services in the Three Village School District, said when the district is notified that there is a sex offender in the area, someone calls the police department for an exact address to determine if the person is within district boundaries. Whatever information the school receives, such as a photo and physical description of the offender, is shared with the public.

In Comsewogue School District, whatever information police send is distributed to all residents "in plain language" in a letter, Superintendent Joseph Rella said. "We don't edit what we get from the police."

In addition to those 10,000 mailings — which are also sent to homes of people who do not have a child in the district — the information is distributed to community organizations and district staff. Although parents can look up the information on the Megan's Law website, Rella said, "that doesn't absolve us of our obligation."

In the Kings Park School District, parents receive a letter directing them to the website, where detailed information about the offenders is posted. Superintendent Susan Agruso said parents can also walk in to receive the information.

This was LaValle's third attempt at getting the bill to pass and it has been amended since it was first introduced. The senator said the reimbursement for the school districts is a new element of the legislation. However, he said he thinks the costs associated with this bill will be minimal, and the schools could possibly use email alerts to comply with it.

If approved, the legislation would go into effect next July.

About LaValle's bill, Gerold said, "Anything we can do to make sure our kids are safe is a good thing," and the legislation would be effective as long as the information being sent out is accurate and timely so "parents can respond appropriately."

However, the superintendent pointed out that a notification to district parents would not cover those with kids too young to attend school.

---

IA - Iowa House Passes Sex Offender Notification

Original Article

03/15/2012

By Erika Cervantes

Iowa lawmakers are working on new rules for nursing homes, residential care facilities and assisted living centers. The proposed changes have to do with sex offenders.

The bill making its way through the state house would require the homes and facilities to check the sex offender registry. If an offender is discovered, every single staff member, resident and resident's family would have to be notified. Also, a plan of safety would have to be put in place to protect staff, residents and their families.

If an offender asks to move into or has a court order to move into a nursing home, assisted living center or residential care, the director or owner must give their approval. The bill also gives homes and facilities the opportunity to deny sex offenders. In that case, the Department of Human Services will be notified, so they can find a spot for the offender.

The bill passed the house unanimously. A senate sub-committee has also recommended approval.

---

MN - House floor session on HF-2394

Video Description:
Motion to suspend Rules in order to take up HF-2394 (Lohmer) Relating to public safety; requiring community notification when a person is released from the Minnesota Sex Offender Program; passage of HF-2394.

See Also:

• House backs Lohmer bill requiring sex-offender notification
• Minn. House passes sex offender notification bill (Bill Passed)

Skip forward to 7:34 to skip all the intro stuff

Video Link


Video Link


Video Link

---

AUSTRALIA - Alphington Lodge sex offender row erupts

Original Article

This reporter is asking the question "Should the community have been consulted?" so go to the link above, and leave a comment. You do not have to create an account to do so.

10/26/2011

By Julia Irwin

ALPHINGTON - Residents are outraged they weren’t warned a convicted sex offender was placed in their neighbourhood.

The 56-year-old resident of Alphington Lodge was on parole after being imprisoned for committing a sexual act with a child when he was charged with wilful and obscene exposure and stalking on October 7, having been accused by a resident of exposing himself and behaving in a lewd manner “four metres from the creche”.

Unbeknown to the community and Yarra Council, the lodge, a former nursing home, was last September transformed into a 27-bed Supported Residential Services facility for people with mental health, disabilities and age-related issues.

“We should have been told who they were putting into that place. It’s dangerous we weren’t told,” neighbouring resident Julie Clark said.
- So what about all the other criminals that may be living around you that aren't sex offenders and who harm others?  Do you know about them?

“How could they put a child sex offender in a street like this, when there’s a creche a few metres away and a kindergarten and two schools within 300m?”

It was not an isolated incident, Ms Clarke said, adding she also found a resident from the lodge breaking into her car and when police arrested him, they told her he had a history of violence.
- And was he a sex offender?  If not, this is exactly the question I posed above?

Yarra Council chief executive Andi Diamond said its records indicated the premises was still an aged-care facility, but an officer visited Alphington Lodge last week and observed it operating as a Supported Residential Service.

“We will contact the Department of Human Services to ask why the proper planning rules have not been followed,” Ms Diamond said.

She said such Supported Residential Services were not government funded but the government was required to register and monitor them.

Health Department spokesman Tim Vainoras said the department’s documents “show an application was lodged with Yarra Council to change the use of the building” on July 1, 2010, and forwarded documents to Leader it says show the permit change. Mr Vainoras said the resident taken into police custody would not be returning.

Alphington Lodge spokesman Neil Young said the centre had “never accepted sex offenders” and “would not have taken this person had corrective services informed them of his status”.

“The lodge and its residents were as upset as everybody else in the local community to have been put at risk in this manner,” Mr Young said.
- You are "at risk" every where you go, period.  Do you know about the people, who may be on your own staff, who have harmed an elderly person in their past, or have some other criminal record that has been sealed?

Corrections Victoria spokesman Sam Bishop said when assessing transitional accommodation for offenders on parole the first concern was for the safety of the community.

Mr Bishop said there were no other parolees at Alphington Lodge and “there were presently no plans to place any other offenders there”.

---

Delaware Sex Offenders - Profiles and Criminal Justice System Outcomes (January 2008)

View the PDF study here

More state specific recidivism studies here

Below is just portions of this study. I advise you to download and view the above PDF document for the entire article.

Introduction

---

Research on sex offenders has gained widespread attention in the past several decades. Media sensationalism and the exposure of sex offense cases, especially those involving children, contribute to the current environment of fear. However, important questions still remain unanswered by research, the media and the criminal justice system. Who are the typical sex offenders? Who are their victims or potential victims, and what can be done to protect the victims?

One may infer from media reports that the typical sex offender is an individual who has already committed a sex offense, is a stranger to the victim, or an authority figure. For example, recent national headlines include a 29 year-old sex offender who pretended to be a 12 year-old boy, and enrolled in four different middle schools. Or, there are the cases in which individuals are preying on children via the internet, and driving hundreds of miles to engage in sexual acts with these children (Dateline NBC, To Catch A Predator).

Truth be known, there is no map, set of guidelines, or picture of a typical sex offender. Much research has reiterated this important point. Previous research provides insights into the sentencing, treatment and recidivism of sex offenders as well as the impact of sex offender laws passed in recent legislative sessions in state and federal government.

This study provides a more complete background of serious sex offenses in Delaware so that we can better understand the effectiveness of our sex offender public safety efforts and penalties as well as the possibilities for rehabilitation and reduction in recidivism. This report seeks to identify a profile of Delaware sex offenders. The purpose of this study is to identify the state of Delaware’s sex offender population for a given year, providing detailed information on Delaware’s sex offenders regarding age, sex, race, relationship to victims, criminal history, conviction, sentencing and recidivism.

Sex Offender Recidivism

---

Fear of sex offender recidivism is the foundation of the Adam Walsh Act resulting in the tightening of state sex offender registration and notification activities. U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales explains, “Too often sex offenders continue to harm children even after previous conviction (DOJ Press Release May 17, 2007).” However, in the world of criminal recidivism, sex offender recidivism rates appear to be an anomaly, and are difficult to interpret. For instance, adult sex offenders have low sex offense recidivism rates. The Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics (Langan et al, 2003) study of sex offenders released from prison in 1994 shows that only 5.3 percent of them were rearrested for a new sex crime after being at risk three years (p.24). Similarly, in the study of Delaware adult sex offenders (Huenke et al, July 2007) released from prison in 2001, only 3.8 percent of them were rearrested for a new sex crime after being at risk three years (p.11). In a very extensive recidivism study in Ohio (Black et al 2001), only 8 percent of sex offenders released from prison return to prison for a new sex offense after being at risk 10 years (p.11).

Yet, there is a bewildering contrast when these adult sex offender recidivism rates are viewed in light of the 2007 Delaware Juvenile Level V (incarceration) and Level IV (24 hour programs) sex offender study (Rodriquez-Labarca and O’Connell June 2007). Twenty-seven percent of the juvenile sex offenders are rearrested for a new sex offense or failure to register as a sex offender offense within three years of release (p. 10). After five years at risk, 41 percent of the juvenile sex offenders were rearrested for a new sex crime or failure to register as a sex offender offense(p. 10). It is striking that sentenced juvenile sex offenders have a recidivism rate about ten times higher than their adult sex offender Level V (incarceration) prison counterparts. Also interesting to note is that 27 percent of the offenders in the Delaware adult sex offender study had sex offenses in their prior criminal history (Huenke et al July 2007, p.7). Likewise, this study finds that 34 percent of the offenders with a 2004 sex offense disposition have a prior sex offense arrest. These comparisons imply that until significant time is served in prison (about four and one half years on average in Delaware), sex offense recidivism remains fairly high (Huenke et al July 2007). Interestingly, the Langan et al (2003) study shows that the longer the time served in prison, the lower the recidivism rate for child molesters (p.19).

Is post-prison sex offense recidivism really as low as reported by official statistics? If so, it might be expected that post-prison recidivism for sex offenders for any crime would also be very low. However, this is not the case. Sex offenders are very likely to be arrested for non-sex crimes after release from prison or conviction. In the BJS (2003) study, 43 percent of the sex offenders released from prison were rearrested within three years for any crime. In Delaware, adult sex offender recidivism is 55 percent for any crime (Huenke et al 2007, p.13), and 68 percent for any new crime for juvenile sex offenders (Rodriquez-Labarca and O’Connell June 2007, p.11).

In most cases, a convicted sex offender has nothing to gain by reporting his/her own sexual criminal acts. Where a sex offender’s treatment should involve an honest assessment of the individual’s deviant sexual fantasies and behavior to be effective, such disclosure may result in further prosecution and punishment. We also know that a very high percentage of sexual assaults go unreported by the victim (Tjaden and Thoennes Jan. 2006). This may be why we react as if the very low post-prison sex offense recidivism rates belie reality. The enhanced sex offender registration and notification programs represent one way that we try to ensure protection, and to locate offenders when sex assault reports come in. Oddly, the Washington State (Schram and Milloy 1995) study shows that community notification has no impact on increasing arrests for sexual assault, though it does result in an increase of arrests of sex offenders for non-sex related crimes (p.19). Thus, increased surveillance, while likely to increase the discovery of new crimes committed by sex offenders, does not ensure catching sex offenders for new criminal sexual acts; however, if incapacitation results from arrests for other offenses, the practice may still be effective in reducing sex offense recidivism.

The secrecy of a sex offender’s life has led Colorado to develop treatment and monitoring programs for sex offenders released to their community, which includes the use of routine polygraph examinations as a way to expand their knowledge of sex offenders’ activities. (Colorado Sex Offender Management Board, June 2004). The Colorado approach to treatment and public safety are not well served unless sex offenders are forthcoming about their deviant sexual activity. “Just as the offender’s current offense may not accurately reflect his level of dangerousness, the information he self-reports will most likely reflect what he is willing to disclose rather than what professionals need to know (English and Heil 2006, p.15).” To gain a step toward more personal freedom in Colorado, sex offenders must complete at least two non-deceptive polygraph tests. Not only is knowledge of sex offender activity more complete in Colorado, using this knowledge appears to be associated with a better understanding of sex offender behavior, both pre and post-conviction, and victim types (English et al 2000). An answer to the surprisingly low “official” sex offender recidivism numbers may be that when polygraph results are compared to the official records, the actual sex offenses in Colorado increases from a median of two to a median of thirty-six, a ratio of 18 to 1 for actual versus official sex offenses (Simon et al 2004).

View the rest of the PDF study here

---

Sex offender recidivism rates below expectations: more than 80% of sex offenders who underwent treatment did not reoffend. (15-Year Prospective Study)

View the article here

12/01/2002

Publication: Clinical Psychiatry News

Author: Finn, Robert

More than 80% of sex offenders who have undergone treatment do not reoffend within 15 years, according to preliminary results of a 15-year prospective study of 626 individuals reported at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.

The study did not examine the efficacy of various forms of treatment, but it did find that sexual offenders who were compliant with their treatment were less likely to reoffend than those who were noncompliant.

The results of the study were reported by Dr. Fred Berlin, who is director of the National Institute for the Study, Prevention, and Treatment of Sexual Trauma, Baltimore, and by Gerard J. McGlone. Ph.D., a clinical fellow at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.

The results are "a far cry from what people often think is occurring, particularly with a group of patients who are this serious, people with multiple prior offenses, people with pedophilia," Dr. Berlin said. "The notion that most of these people would quickly be back into trouble was simply not true."

The preliminary 15-year data update the group's 5-year study of the same individuals (Am. J. Forensic Psychiatry 12[3]:5-28, 1991). That study found an overall 9.7% recidivism rate.

The estimated rate of additional recidivism for the following 10 years was 9.3%, for a total of 19% over 15 years.

Both studies followed 626 individuals treated at the Johns Hopkins sexual disorders clinic between 1978 and 1990. Of those, 406 were pedophiles, 111 were exhibitionists, and 109 were characterized as "sexually aggressive," with most diagnosed as "paraphilic disorder not otherwise specified" or antisocial personality disorder.

The patients underwent a variety of treatments at the clinic, including individual, group, and family therapy. Approximately 40% of the patients received an-tiandrogenic drugs in an effort to lessen their sex drive.

Investigators examined three local and national databases for evidence of recidivism in the 5-year study.

Anyone who was charged with a sexual crime was included; conviction was not necessary.

For the 15-year follow-up, investigators have so far examined only Maryland state databases and have not yet examined national databases.

The 5-year study showed that 7.4% of pedophiles, 4.6% of sexual aggressives, and 23.4% of exhibitionists reoffended sexually The 15-year study added an additional 8.6% of pedophiles (total 16%), 10% of sexual aggressives (total 14.6%), and 10.8% of exhibitionists, (total 34.2%), the investigators said.

For the 15-year study, investigators have not yet reported recidivism rates for compliant vs. noncompliant patients. These data were reported at the 5-year follow-up.

For pedophiles, 2.9% of the treatment compliant and 11.1% of the noncompliant reoffended sexually For sexual aggressives, 2.8% of the compliant and 8.1% of the noncompliant reoffended sexually

And for exhibitionists, 12.5% of the compliant and 32.6% of the noncompliant reoffended sexually

On the issue of exhibitionists, Dr. Berlin observed, "Even with treatment, this is a very driven, compulsive disorder. The good news, though, is that in almost every instance where there was recidivism, it was a non-hands-on offense.

"These people were not recidivating by doing other things. With very few exceptions they were exposing. ... The more dangerous patients, the ones who had been sexually aggressive or who were pedophiles, had the lowest recidivism rates.

Nonsexual recidivism rates were considerably higher in all groups. At the 5-year follow-up, 9.2% of compliant pe dophiles and 26.2% of noncompliant pedophiles were charged with a nonsexual offense such as burglary. Among sexual aggressives, the rates were 14% of compliant patients and 29.7% of non-compliant patients. And among exhibitionists the rates were 10.4% of compliant patients and 4 1.9% of non compliant patients.

The study's results have important public policy implications, Dr. Berlin said.

Over the years, for example, legislatures in all 50 states and the District of Columbia have passed numerous laws involving the civil commitment, registration, and community notification of sexual offenders.

In addition, a federal law that took effect recently requires the states to notify the public about sexual offenders who are enrolled or working at college campuses.

The idea behind these registries and public notifications is the notion that sexual offenders are difficult to rehabilitate and have a particularly high rate of recidivism. (See related story page 5.)

But the data show that sexual offenders actually have a lower rate of recidivism that those who commit other kinds of crimes.

And some experts speculate that these new laws just might have the unintended consequence of actually increasing the risk of recidivism.

"We think that many of the people who seem to be doing well in our treatment program have done well because they could get jobs," Dr. Berlin said. "They could fit into their community.

"We now have these registries. Are [sexual offenders who have been punished and released going to be able to get housing? Are they going to be able to get work? Are we inadvertently actually going to make it more difficult for some of these people?"

---

How often do sexual offenders re-offend sexually?

View the article here

Research summary Vol. 9 No. 4 July 2004 Question

Background

Of all criminal offenders, sexual offenders create the most public concern and attract the most media attention. Consequently, extraordinary measures are often taken to monitor sexual offenders released to the community (special police and probation supervision, community notification, sex offender registries). Knowing how often various types of sexual offenders re-offend would be useful for setting policy to effectively manage sexual offenders.

Method

The present sample (N = 4,724) combines 10 sub-samples ranging in size from 191 offenders to 1,138 offenders. These samples were drawn from jurisdictions in Canada, the United States, England and Wales. The offenders in these samples were followed, post-release, for an average of seven years - some as long as 32 years. Half of these samples used sexual reconviction as the recidivism criteria while the other half used a new charge for a sexual offence. These samples contained a wide variation in offenders, those with a previous sexual offence on their record and those without, incest offenders, "boy victim" and "girl victim" child molesters, rapists, older offenders, younger offenders, and those who have been offence-free in the community for an extended period.

Answer

When the whole sample was examined, it was found that within the first five years of release, 14% had a new charge or conviction for a sexual offence. This percentage represents an overall average for a mixed group of sexual offenders. In the following five years (between years 5 and 10) an additional six percent (6%) of sexual offenders failed and in the five years following that (between years 10 and 15) an additional four percent (4%) failed. Between years 15 and 20, post-release, an additional three percent (3%) had a new charge or conviction for a sexual offence. After twenty years, 73% of sexual offenders had not been charged with, or convicted of, another sexual offence in the community.

In a sub-analysis, offenders were divided into those with a previous sexual offence on their record and those without a previous sexual offence. It was found that offenders who had no previous sexual offence (first time sexual offenders) were significantly less likely to sexually re-offend than those with a previous offence. Offenders with no previous sexual offences recidivated at about half the rate of repeat sexual offenders (19% vs. 37% after 15 years). Additional analyses indicated that "boy victim" child molesters sexually re-offended at a higher rate than rapists who, in turn, recidivated more often than "girl victim" child molesters or incest offenders. It was also found that offenders over the age of 50 re-offended less often than younger offenders. As well, the longer an offender remained offence-free in the community, the less likely they were to re-offend.

Policy implications

1. The level of sexual recidivism in sexual offenders is lower than is commonly believed.
2. Policies based on the assumption that all sexual offenders re-offend at a high rate or that all sexual offenders pose the same recidivism risk may lead to over-supervising lower risk offenders.
3. Actuarial assessment tools can assist in differentiating high-risk offenders from lower risk offenders.

Source

Harris, A., & Hanson, R. K. Sex offender recidivism: A simple question. (User Report 2004-03). Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada.

---