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 MegansLaw. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MegansLaw. Show all posts

Monday, May 6, 2013

NJ - Opinion: Megan's Law registry has become 'scarlet letter of the internet age,' needs revision

Original Article

05/06/2013

By Shana Rowan

The horror that Megan Kanka’s parents endured in the loss of their young daughter is unfathomable. Admirably, they are dedicating much of their lives to preventing what happened to Megan from happening to anyone else’s child. Unfortunately, their recent effort at modernizing Megan’s Law (“Kanka family seeks updates to exclude sexting between children, increase failure to register penalties,” April 15), ignores the research conducted on sex crimes since the initiation of the registry notification law named for their daughter.

Some of their proposals make sense, such as increasing the ratio of parole officers to registrants, as the entire community benefits from compliant sex offenders. It also makes sense to prevent teenagers from being put on the registry for “sexting.” But given that teenagers re-offend at lower rates than adults and show high receptivity to treatment, why limit this reform to “sexting”? The vast majority of juvenile offenders deserve a second chance, without the life sentence of the registry.

Human Rights Watch released the compelling report “Raised on the Registry,” last week, which exposes the far-reaching negative consequences of forcing juveniles to publicly register as sex offenders. Ranging from families forced to live apart, lifelong stigmatism for offenders convicted as pre-teens, inability to provide for their families due to lack of employment to self-harm and suicide in several cases, the ramifications of public registration for juveniles are extensive and severe. Any serious modernization of Megan’s Law must include a reassessment of placing juvenile offenders on the public registry.

Proposing that sex offenders who fail to register should receive automatic prison sentences violates the principle that a punishment should fit the crime. A 2010 report by the Minnesota Department of Corrections found no correlation between failure to register and sexual recidivism. Should this proposal become law, offenders could face a tougher sentence for missing a paperwork filing deadline than the original offense that put them on the registry in the first place, and New Jersey taxpayers will foot the bill for unnecessary incarceration. This money would be far better spent on prevention and public education initiatives to help parents become more aware of child sexual abuse which, in a vast majority of cases, is committed by someone the child knows — not a stranger on the registry.

As we approach the 20th anniversary of Megan’s Law next year, we at USA FAIR (Families Advocating an Intelligent Registry) share the Kankas’ goal that now would be a good time to reassess the registry and modernize it based on the extensive research we now have that did not exist in 1994.

In the aftermath of Megan’s murder, her parents declared on their foundation’s website that “Every parent should have the right to know if a dangerous sexual predator moves into their neighborhood.” Megan was tragically murdered by a depraved individual with a prior conviction for a violent sexual assault that involved the abduction of a child. Certainly, any parent should be alerted if such a predator moves into their neighborhood.

However, over the last two decades, the registry has morphed into the scarlet letter of the internet age, posting online information of former offenders who are neither violent nor predators and pose little risk of reoffending.

USA FAIR does not oppose the sex offender registry. We do, however, strongly believe that public notification should be applied only to the truly dangerous, because of the life destruction that can result from being so marked. As family members of registrants, we know this destruction all too well, as we frequently suffer the collateral damage of the registry, which can include the harassment of a registrant’s children, the loss of employment of a spouse and the break-up of families due to registry restrictions.
- We at Sex Offender Issues do not believe in any online registry for anybody.  The registry needs to be taken offline and used by police.  It's nothing more than an online hit-list for vigilantes now.

The good news, over the last 20 years, is that extensive studies contradict the myth of high sex-offender recidivism. Contrary to still widely held beliefs, sex offenders have one of the lowest re-offense rates in the criminal justice system. (These low rates existed both before and after Megan’s Law.) And we have learned that those low re-offense rates drop even further with years of offense-free tenure in the community and advancing age.

Further, we have identified which subsets of offenders do have a higher risk of reoffending, such as pedophiles with multiple child victims and sex offenders with other non-sexual crimes on their rap sheet.

Let’s modernize the public registry by making it smarter, by using the vast body of research to stay true to the Kankas’ founding principle of targeting the truly dangerous — while allowing the majority of former offenders to continue rebuilding their lives as good citizens and providers for their families.

Shana Rowan is executive director of USA Families Advocating an Intelligent Registry (usafair.org).


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.


OH - Ohio Public Defender’s Office says sex offender registry doesn’t improve public safety

Original Article

04/12/2013

Ohio will begin tracking arsonists this summer through a new registry similar to the one used to track sex offenders.

A law passed last year by the General Assembly will require people convicted of arson-related offenses to register at their local sheriff's office each year for at least 10 years. Failing to register will be a felony.

Supporters tout the measure as a tool for law enforcement. Critics argue, among other points, that the registry will be a burden for sheriffs already charged with keeping the sex-offender registry.

"The sex-offender registry has been around for a long time, and the research that's out there says that it has no positive impact on the public safety," Amy Borror, spokeswoman for the Ohio Public Defender's Office, told The Plain Dealer. "And, if anything, it might have a negative impact on public safety because it creates this administrative burden."

The registry has been around for almost 20 years and has been public for more than 15. The Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children Act, enacted by Congress in 1994, required convicted sex offenders to record their address with local law enforcement. Megan’s Law, added in 1996, allowed the information to be given directly to the public. The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), passed in 2006, set registration standards that widened the reach of registration for the entire nation.

PolitiFact Ohio knew the subject could be an emotional one. We asked Borror how the claim is supported that the registry does not improve public safety.

She referred us first to the website of the Public Defender's Office, which links to a number of reports, and to a special issue of the peer-reviewed journal Criminal Justice and Behavior, from May 2010, which was dedicated to sex offender issues.

Criminal Justice and Behavior published 10 academic studies related to sex offenses, focusing on the question of whether public policies concerning sex offenders enhance the safety of children and communities.

The journal found that the subject is consistently one of the leading policy issues on legislative agendas. It concluded, however, that "sex offender policies are often inconsistent with empirical evidence about sex offender risks, recidivism, reintegration and supervision...."

"Legislators cite the news media and the views of their constituents -- not research evidence -- as their primary sources of information about sex offenses and offenders," the journal said.

One of the published studies, by criminologists with the University of Massachusetts, Lynn University and the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, focused on Ohio and Oklahoma, two of the first states to meet federal guidelines set by SORNA. Those guidelines classify offenders into one of three categories determined by solely by convicted offense. (Previously, judges determined what risk offenders posed and assigned them to one of three registration categories.)

Drawing on data from more than 28,000 cases in Ohio and from other research, the study’s conclusions "shed doubt on the public safety utility of the SORNA classification system." It found that a disproportionate number of offenders were classified as high risk, placing greater burdens, perhaps unnecessarily, on law enforcement personnel and budgets.

"From a public safety perspective," the study found, the SORNA classification guidelines hurt the ability of the system "to effectively discriminate between those who pose a substantial risk to society and those who pose minimal risk," and also contradict evidence about the risk of repeat offenses for both adult sex offenders and juveniles.

Another report, from the Minnesota Department of Corrections, studied sexual offenders who were jailed for failing to register with local law enforcement agencies. It found that the failure to register was not a predictor of repeated crime, other than future failure to register.

An analysis of adult arrest data from 1990 to 2005 in South Carolina found that sex offender registration laws did have a deterrent effect on first-time adult offenders, but no effect on juveniles and no effect on recidivism.

Borror also pointed us to a 2009 study from the state of New York’s Office of Mental Health that specifically compares a risk-based classification system (which Ohio used to have) to the offense-based registration system, which Ohio has now.

It concluded that the current system "falls short of increasing public safety," citing five earlier studies that found registration and notification laws were "ineffective methods of reducing sexual victimizations."

It also noted there is evidence that such laws actually lead to more criminal behavior by aggravating the factors linked to it -- an unintended consequence of reducing or denying employment, educational, social and housing opportunities.

"Although well intended, such laws have done little (if anything) to increase public safety and may in fact be lowering it," the study said.

(A 2007 report by the non-government organization Human Rights Watch detailed the harassment of registered offenders because of online community notification.)

We looked further and found a 2008 report (PDF) funded by the U.S. Justice Department examining the original Megan's Law in New Jersey.

"Despite widespread community support for these laws," it said, "there is virtually no evidence to support their effectiveness in reducing either new first-time sex offenses (through protective measures or general deterrence) or sex re-offenses (through protective measures and specific deterrence)."

"Given the lack of demonstrated effect of Megan’s Law on sexual offenses, the growing costs may not be justifiable," it said.

Another study (PDF), by J.J. Prescott of the University of Michigan Law School and Jonah Rockoff of Columbia Business School and the National Bureau of Economic Research, examined data from 15 states over more than 10 years.

They found that registering sex offenders does reduce sex crime, especially among victims with a personal connection to offenders, most likely because of better police monitoring. They also found, however, that making the registry information available to the public has the opposite effect and increases crime.

"There is little evidence of a decrease in crimes against strangers," the study said. "We also find evidence that community notification deters crime, but in a way unanticipated by legislators. Our results suggest that community notification deters first-time sex offenders, but may increase recidivism by registered offenders by increasing the relative attractiveness of criminal behavior. This finding is consistent with work by criminologists showing that notification may contribute to recidivism by imposing social and financial costs on registered sex offenders and, as a result, making non-criminal activity relatively less attractive."

"We regard this latter finding as potentially important, given that the purpose of community notification is the reduction of recidivism," the authors concluded.

The federal Government Accountability Office evaluated the effects of SORNA in a report issued earlier this year.

The GAO noted that law’s purpose is to protect the public from sex offenders, but found "analysis of the act’s effect on public safety has been limited."

Positive effects included "improved monitoring of registered sex offenders" and better information sharing between law enforcement agencies.

Negative consequences found by the GAO included a lack of consideration of the risk of repeating sexual offenses in classifying offenders; a disproportionate increase in the workload of law enforcement agencies, and increased problems for registered sex offenders to find work or housing.

What conclusion can we draw about Borror’s statement for the Ohio Public Defender’s Office, that research shows the sex offender registry has no positive impact?

We found that research has been done generally on the effectiveness of sex offender registration and notification laws.

We found that studies indicate the laws have no clear effect on recidivism, or repeat offenses, which is their intended target, and are ineffective in assessing and managing risk.

Although there is some indication that registration and community notification may deter first-time adult offenders, the studies find that the deterrence doesn’t extend to juveniles -- and that community notification likely increases repeat sex crimes and other crimes.

With that information needed for clarification, we rate the statement Mostly True.


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


Tuesday, February 19, 2013

PA - Law change means some will be registered sex offenders for life

Original Article

02/18/2013

Late in 2002, [name withheld] of Hazleton pleaded guilty to molesting a 7-year-old girl and was sentenced to serve one year in prison and register as a sex offender for 10 years.
- And anything beyond this is an unconstitutional ex post facto law.

His 10 years on the registry would have expired on May 15, but a little more than a year ago the law changed.

Now [name withheld] must register as a sex offender for life.
- And that is unconstitutional additional punishment!  Imagine, if they can do this, then they can change any law and re-punish you for something you did years ago.

"What I can't understand is how can they do this? If you are already under Megan's Law, how can they add to that? That's very upsetting," [name withheld] said.
- Because they claim it's regulatory and not punishment, which we all know is a load of BS!

The U.S. Constitution bans ex post facto laws - those that take effect after the fact.
- And so does the states constitution (section 17).

However, in challenges to the sex offender registry under Megan's Law, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that the registry is a regulatory law, not a criminal law, so the ex post facto rule doesn't apply.

An update to Megan's Law in Pennsylvania that Gov. Tom Corbett signed on Dec. 20, 2011, changes the registration requirement from 10 years to life for some crimes, including indecent assault of a person less than 13 years of age, to which [name withheld] pleaded guilty. The law now requires offenders to register for 15 years, 25 years or life depending on how their crime is categorized.

Some offenders who completed their time on the registry before the law changed must re-register.

Others who never had to register when their cases were adjudicated must go on the registry. An Altoona attorney told his local newspaper, the Mirror, in December 2012 that at least three people who accepted pleas keeping them off the register want to negotiate new deals or challenge the new law that requires them to register.

The attorney, Thomas M. Dickey, did not return a telephone call asking for an update on those cases.

"I'm looking for a sexual offender to challenge this as ex post facto," Shelly Clevenger, assistant professor at Illinois State University, said.

Clevenger is studying the retroactive law in Illinois, where sexual offenders face additional restrictions.

"We have some strange laws. Sexual offenders can't go to a public park, be on a walking trail, operate a food vehicle. The state is starting to legislate what offenders can and cannot do," she said.

Does the law work?

In her dissertation for a doctorate in criminology at Indiana University of Pennsylvania in May 2012, Clevenger studied the effectiveness of Megan's Law in Pennsylvania. The law takes its name from Megan Kanka, a 7-year-old girl who was sexually abused and murdered in New Jersey in 1994.

"Overall, the results of the current study, coupled with results from previous studies which have examined the effectiveness of Megan's Law, indicate that the legislation has not been effective in reducing and/or preventing rape, sex offenses and/or the murder of children," Clevenger wrote in her dissertation.

Since Megan's Law took effect in 1996 in Pennsylvania, the incidences of rape, other sex crimes and murder of a person younger than 13 decreased in urban areas, Clevenger's study found. But in suburban and rural areas, rape and sexual offenses increased, according to her study.

Laura Ahearn, executive director of Parents for Megan's Law in Stony Brook, N.Y., said case statistics alone don't measure the effectiveness of the law. Creating a registry for sex offenders made people more aware of sex crimes. That might have caused people to report abuse instead of keeping secrets, Ahearn said.

Instances where the registry prevented a crime don't show up on statistics, but parents who consulted the registry have prevented children from playing where an offender lived, she said.

"There's plenty of anecdotal evidence," Ahearn said.

When Clevenger conducted research for her doctorate, she wasn't expecting crime rates to move in different directions in urban and rural areas. When thinking about the results, she noticed that the drop in urban crimes coincided with a national trend. She reasoned that Megan's Law might have enticed offenders to move from urban areas to suburbs and rural areas.

"That was the best theory I could come up with," Clevenger said.

Assorted laws in municipalities around the nation set distances from schools, playgrounds or other public places where sex offenders may not live.

Clevenger said residence rules and competition for rental housing in cities might have led some sex offenders to move from urban areas to suburban or rural areas.

Life on the registry

In Hazleton, [name withheld] said he cannot go to events at the Wiltsie Center at the Historic Castle, such as the George Thorogood concert on March 10 that he would like to attend.

"We can't even go to church," he said, citing a city law.

[name withheld] hasn't had a job since his release from prison, and he said that's common for people on the registry.

"Very few of us are able to work. Employers won't hire. They don't want their businesses on the registry," [name withheld] said.

He receives disability payments.

"I've been trying to get off disability and find a job. I'm never going to be able to. Nobody's going to hire me," [name withheld] said.

His criminal record includes a conviction for arson in 1999. Two years ago, workers at the office of state Rep. Tarah Toohil said [name withheld] harassed them. In 2005, [name withheld] was charged with failing to report a change of address to the registry.

Megan's Law requires offenders to report address changes within 48 hours. Under current law, if [name withheld] misses that deadline, he can be charged with a felony and sentenced to prison for up to 10 years.
- So if it's regulatory and not punishment, then why would he be sentenced to 10 years in prison, more than what his actual crime received (1 year)?  Sounds like additional punishment to us.

Four times a year, he must report to a police station to update his information on the registry. Police take a new photo of him, note his address, emails, workplace and whether he is enrolled in a school or college or owns a vehicle or boat.

"If I go on vacation, I have to register in that state and tell Pennsylvania police that I'm going there. So I don't go nowhere," [name withheld] said.

No one has ever harmed him because he is on the registry. A note on the website for the registry says anyone who intimidates or harasses a person on the registry can be prosecuted or be liable in a civil lawsuit.
- Doesn't mean it doesn't happen, it does, all the time, as seen here.

Still, [name withheld] remains fearful.

"You don't know what vigilante is out there. I don't trust nobody. All my trust is gone," he said.

Proactive parents

Parents have different fears when trying to protect their children.

The registry provides a starting point by listing people who are potential threats because of their past actions.
- It only lists some people, ex-sex offenders, not all criminals who have or may harm children, like murderers, gang members, drug dealers, DUI offenders, kidnappers, etc.

"There are pedophiles on the registry and people on the registry that you should look out for," Clevenger said.

But she said the registry can breed a false sense of security. Parents should realize that not every offender is on the registry, nor are offenders likely to be strangers, Clevenger said.

The case of Jerry Sandusky underscores that sexual offenders can avoid detection for years while remaining off the registry. Sandusky, a former assistant football coach at Penn State University, is serving a prison sentence of 30 to 60 years for abusing at least 10 boys during a 20-year span.

The registry started to prevent strangers from abducting children, as happened to Megan Kanka. Her death outraged the nation, but the circumstances of her case are relatively rare.

Most children are abused by someone whom they know, Clevenger and Ahearn said.

"The fact that most crime(s) of this nature (are) not committed by a stranger, but by an intimate, who likely does not appear on the registry, suggests that this legislation was passed without any attention to the facts and realities of sex offenses," Clevenger wrote in her dissertation.
- Of course they ignored the facts.  If you go back and review the history, and the many recidivism studies, you will see the law doesn't jive with the facts.

Ahearn said Parents for Megan's Law recommends several strategies to reduce child sexual abuse. Her group staffs a 24-hour hotline. Members lead education programs for parents and children from preschool to high school. The group counsels victims.
- And now, in New York, they are also being contracted to MONITOR ex-sex offenders!

"When the victim is provided services, they are more likely to participate in the criminal justice system and less likely to be revictimized," Ahearn, the director, said.
- Do you have facts to back this statement up?  Or you just assume we will believe you?  Like domestically abused men/women who move from bad relationship to another, We're sure your statement is not exactly true, it's just an assumption on your part.

She said the group also supports police. Through a new program with Suffolk County, Long Island, N.Y., the group will hire retired police to verify addresses of people on the registry.

Ahearn favors having offenders stay on the registry for life and believes they also should have individual monitoring plans. People who comply with the registry requirements have a lower rate of repeating crimes, she said.
- Ex-sex offenders in general have low recidivism rates, and there is no study or evidence to back up her assumption.

Local laws that keep offenders from living in sight of children reduce temptation to commit further crimes, Ahearn said. The local laws, she said, will vary among communities because of population densities, but shouldn't be so restrictive that courts will overturn them.
- Again, her opinion doesn't make it a fact.  Show us a study to prove that Ms. Ahearn!  She's also making the usual blanket statement making it appear as if all ex-sex offenders are out drooling over children, which is false.  Many have not touched a child in any way, yet she makes it appear as if all are child molesters.

"You want to avoid a registered sex offender having his backyard against the backyard of a day care or a school," Ahearn said.
- What if the ex-sex offenders crime didn't involve a child?

She referred to sex offenders as pied pipers who befriend children and parents while setting the stage to abuse a child.
- You see, she thinks all ex-sex offenders are child molesters.  That would be like saying all humans are murderers because a couple are.  It's the same logic!

"Most child sexual abuse happens with somebody in an existing, trusted relationship," Ahearn said. "That doesn't mean the relationship is known by parents."
- What about the ex-sex offenders who had nothing to do with children but their crime was against an adult? Stop assuming all ex-sex offenders are child molesting, pedophile, predators who are lurking behind every corner just waiting to jump on your child, that is absurd!


Thursday, January 24, 2013

NY - Families of Registered Sex Offenders: “Remove Misleading Statistics from Web”

Original Article

01/24/2013

Family Members of Registered Sex Offenders Call on Parents for Megan’s Law to remove misleading statistics from their website

Long Island - USA FAIR, Inc., a national advocacy organization formed by the family members of people required to register with the sex offender registry, today publicly urged Parents for Megan’s Law Executive Director Laura Ahern to take down misleading statistics from their website that reinforces the myth of high sex offender recidivism.

According to the U.S. Justice Department and numerous other agencies and institutions that have researched recidivism (PDF), sexual offenders have one of the lowest recidivism rates in the criminal justice system. Yet, the myth of high sex offender recidivism has formed the foundational falsehood for the never-endng sanctions imposed on law abiding former offenders through the sex offender registry”, said Shana Rowan, Executive Director of USA FAIR.

While we applaud Parents for Megan’s Law for their mission to protect children, as an entity that is funded in part with public funds, they have an obligation to not mislead the public through the misuse of statistics, such as presenting a study of a sub-set of dangerous recidivists and presenting those findings as representative of the entire population of former sex offenders,” said Rowan.

In a letter sent to Parents for Megan’s Law (PDF) on December 6, 2012, USA FAIR raised objections to statements made on their website, including claims that the “typical” offender against children had committed an average of 280 crimes and has between 360 and 380 victims in his lifetime. USA FAIR pointed out that the sample of this study was not “typical” of former offenders and that even among this subset of high-risk offenders, a small percentage of the subjects were responsible for a disproportionately high number of offenses, which significantly skewed the “average” numbers. In fact, according to Rowan, “When you look at the median numbers of this very study it reveals that half of the subjects committed four or fewer offenses and had three or fewer victims. So even the “typical” subject of this study did not have the number of victims that Parents for Megan’s Law claims. And while three victims is three too many, it is a far cry from the 360 to 380 that their website presents.”

Rowan announced that USA FAIR decided today to go public with its request to Parents for Megan’s Law to correct their website because following several phone calls and emails by Rowan to Ahern to follow-up on the December 6th letter, there has been no response. “Ms. Ahern has every right to disagree with USA FAIR on policy issues, but as long as she takes public money she should present this important issue with facts and not false fears,” said Rowan.

USA FAIR has made shining the light on the myth of high sex offender recidivism one of its top goals for 2013. A 2010 survey by the Center for Sex Offender Management of the U.S. Department of Justice found that 72% of Americans believe that the sex crime recidivism rates are 50% or higher, with a third believing it is more than 75%. Only 3% believe it is less than 25% – even though actual recidivism rates are considerably below 25%. New studies are constantly confirming low recidivism, with the latest being released last month showing a recidivism rate in four states of 10% after 10 years, with rates dropping sharply with years of offense-free tenure in the community. (https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/240099.pdf)

As the loved-ones of people who are required to register, we know that the vast majority of former sex offenders are law abiding citizens today who are just trying to rebuild their lives and be good providers for their families. Once the myth of high sex offender recidivim is firmly dicredited, it will allow us to end our one-size-fits-all approach to sex offender laws and focus our policies on targeting the truly dangerous,” concluded Rowan.


Tuesday, January 15, 2013

PA - Appealing Pennsylvania’s New Megan’s Law

Original Article

This is an excellent article. Click the link above to read the entire thing, and see the video.

12/18/2012

On December 20, 2012, Pennsylvania will begin enforcing its new changes to Megan's Law. By now, many people have realized that they or their friends will be negatively impacted by these laws. For most, it's probably hard to grasp how such laws could be legal. Undoubtedly, many appeals will be filed to challenge these laws. In some states such as Ohio, many of the retroactive provisions have been found to be unconstitutional upon being appealed, and have been reversed. In other states, the high courts have upheld the new laws. The purpose of this article is to educate you all about why these new laws may or may not ultimately be determined to be illegal.

The United States Constitution, as well as the Pennsylvania Constitution, contain clauses that prevent legal consequences from being changed retroactively. Section 17 of the Pennsylvania Constitution reads:

"No ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, or making irrevocable any grant of special privileges or immunities, shall be passed."

For example, one cannot be arrested today based upon a new law if the actions of that individual were legal during the time the actions were taken. Additionally, if an individual were sentenced to the maximum term of 10 years of imprisonment for a crime in 1999, and in 2002 the maximum sentence for that crime changed to 20 years, the sentence of that individual cannot be changed retroactively to conform to the new law.

However, in order for a retroactive law to violate the ex post facto clause, the legal consequence that is changed retroactively must be "punitive" (i.e., considered to be punishment), as opposed to civil, remedial, or a collateral consequence. Some examples of collateral consequences include loss of the right to vote, enlist in the armed services, or own a firearm. Although it may be hard to imagine, some high courts have ruled that sex offender registration requirements are not punitive, but are instead collateral consequences.

However, in State v. Williams,129 Ohio St.3d 344, 2011-Ohio-3374 (PDF), the Ohio Supreme Court concluded that the requirements of Ohio's new sex offender laws based upon the Adam Walsh Act had transformed the law from remedial to punitive. Their decision was not based upon a single requirement, but instead was based upon the totality of the requirements. The Court cited the various new requirements, and also stated two other factors that influenced their decision: 1) the procedures for registration and classification of sex offenders were placed within Ohio's criminal code, and 2) failure to comply with certain registration requirements subjected an offender to criminal prosecution.



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.


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.