CA - California RSOL Challenges Santa Ana Ordinance, Registration Process

Original Article

05/03/2013

California RSOL filed a lawsuit in federal district court on May 2 challenging the sex offender ordinance and sex offender registration process in the City of Santa Ana. The ordinance contains presence restrictions including a prohibition of registrants using the city’s public library. The registration process requires all registrants to register inside the Santa Ana Jail for periods up to four hours as well to wear a prison uniform. Registrants are not allowed to leave during the registration process and are prohibited from using cell phones or any other communications devices during that process.

“The City of Santa Ana is robbing registrants of their constitutional rights,” stated CA RSOL President Janice Bellucci. “Not only are they prohibited from participating in most recreational areas in the city, they are not allowed to access public information in the city’s library.”

CA RSOL testified in oppositing to the ordinance at a City Council meeting in June 2012 prior to its passage. In addition, CA RSOL wrote letters to the City Council advising them that the proposed ordinance violated both the federal and state constitutions.

“It is indeed unfortunate that the City of Santa Ana failed to heed the warnings provided by CA RSOL,” stated CA RSOL Treasurer Frank Lindsay. He noted that the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals declared unconstitutional a similar ordinance in the City of Albuquerque. As a result of that ruling, the City of Albuquerque paid the ACLU more than $1.5 million in attorneys’ fees and costs.

The lawsuit also alleges that the registration process for registrants within the City of Santa Ana violates the 4th amendment of the federal constitution because registrants are falsely imprisoned when placed in the Santa Ana Jail. City officials have stated it is necessary to register sex offenders in the jail because that is where registrants are to be photographed. When registrants are wearing jail uniforms, their photographs are taken and those photographs are later posted on the state’s Megan’s Law website.

“Photos of registrants wearing a prison uniform give the false impression that they are incarcerated,” stated Bellucci. “This blatant disregard for the truth must be stopped.”

There are three plaintiffs in this lawsuit — John Doe, Jane Doe and CA RSOL.

---

NM - State sex offender act modified

Original Article

04/25/2013

By Laura London

Lawmakers amended the state’s Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act during the Legislature’s 2013 session, closing some loopholes and clarifying issues.

HB 570 (PDF): Sex Offender Tiers, Registration & Information, effective July 1, was discussed at the New Mexico Association of Counties legislative update April 10 at the Socorro County Annex.

HB 570 makes many changes to SORNA, including redefining “out-of-state registrant” to mean anybody who establishes a residence in New Mexico while required to register as a sex offender in another state, according to the summary of the bill included with its fiscal impact report, which is posted on the Legislature’s website.

District 15 Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto said the bill cleans up some legal equivalency issues regarding out-of-state sex offenders who move to New Mexico. He explained New Mexico has certain specified crimes that will get a person on the sex offender registry, as do all other states. However, if another state’s specified crime doesn’t really have an equivalent under New Mexico law, an offender listed on that state’s registry may not have to register in New Mexico.

Ivey-Soto said HB 570 was partly inspired by the case of [name withheld], who had to register as a sex offender in California but not in New Mexico.

According to the New Mexico Supreme Court opinion filed in [name withheld]'s case in December 2012, [name withheld] had been convicted on a misdemeanor statute in California for “annoying or molesting” minors due to his inappropriate touching of several boys, and he had to register as a sex offender. [name withheld] then moved to New Mexico in 2006, and in 2008 was charged with failure to register as a sex offender in Las Cruces.

The district court in Las Cruces denied [name withheld]'s motion to dismiss the charge, according to background information included with the Supreme Court opinion, but the state Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s ruling. The Court of Appeals held that the California “annoying or molesting” statute was not equivalent to New Mexico’s criminal sexual contact of a minor law under SORNA; therefore, [name withheld] was not required to register upon moving to New Mexico.

The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals’ decision in December and sent the case back to district court, stating in its opinion there was not enough record of [name withheld]'s actual conduct to determine whether it would have been considered a registrable offense in New Mexico.

“And so, we dealt with some of the equivalency issues,” Ivey-Soto said. “We also dealt with the time frame for having to register if you move here from another state.”

Ivey-Soto said the bill requires offenders to register for the same amount of time as required in their old state, or for as long as they would have to register had they been convicted in New Mexico — whichever time period is longer.

“And part of this, of course — all the states are competing so that no one is a haven for sex offenders,” Ivey-Soto said. “So part of it is we want to put as many disincentives as possible.”

For offenders moving to different addresses within New Mexico, Ivey-Soto said the law tightens up the period of time they have to update their registration with law enforcement. They previously had 10 days to update any changes in their information with the local sheriff’s department; now they have five days.

Ivey-Soto said the bill also expands the list of information law enforcement has to collect from sex offenders, as well as standardizes the list so all sheriff’s departments collect the same information. He said that previously different sheriff’s departments were collecting different details according to what each considered relevant.

HB 570′s fiscal impact report states sex offenders must provide the sheriff’s department not only a current address, but the physical and mailing address, as well as the address of every place where the offender habitually lives; the names, email addresses, monikers or other self-identifiers the offender uses on social networking sites; telephone numbers; professional licenses; license plates or other identifiers, plus descriptions of any vehicle owned or primarily operated by the offender, including aircraft and watercraft; name and address of any school or institution of higher education the offender attends; and copies of the offender’s passport and immigration documents.

Ivey-Soto said the bill also clarifies that a sex offender’s place of business — if the business has contact with children — must be posted along with the offender’s other information on the state’s sex offender registry website.

Ivey-Soto said the law should save money for the state, as well as time for sheriff’s departments, since it directs the state Department of Public Safety to send a first-class letter to each sex offender’s last known address two weeks prior to their reporting deadline. He said this will hopefully increase compliance by reminding offenders of their reporting deadline.

“The other thing it will do, if you move — guess what — the letter gets returned,” Ivey-Soto said. “And that’s a whole lot cheaper than sending a squad out to knock on everybody’s door … and we can identify a lot quicker who may have absconded.”

---

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.

---

NC - Sex offender registry expansion going to McCrory, adds human trafficking

Original Article

04/16/2013

RALEIGH (AP) - The General Assembly has agreed that people convicted in North Carolina of human trafficking should register with local sheriffs as registered sex offenders.

The House unanimously approved legislation (SB-122, HB-221) Tuesday that would add the crime to the list of those requiring the registration if the trafficking involved minors or if it was committed with the intent of sexual servitude. The Senate already approved it last month, so now it heads to Gov. Pat McCrory's desk for his signature.

Such registered offenders must alert sheriffs where they live or if they move. They can't live near schools or day care centers or work in positions where they must interact with minors.

---

NC - Sen. Thom Goolsby admits sex offender registration is a harassment package, thus proving punitive intent!

Video Description:
Sen. Thom Goolsby provides update on law that will turn sex traffickers (pimps) into sex offenders subject to monitoring and registration with local sheriff's departments. Today, the bill cleared House Judiciary B Committee. (S122, PDF)

Video Link

---

OK - Sex offenders make easy target for Okla. lawmakers

Original Article

04/06/2013

By SEAN MURPHY

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - Oklahoman sex offenders who claim state laws make it practically impossible to return to productive lives are finding little sympathy before a Legislature that cannot stomach their crimes, even if they don't involve young children.

"All I ask is that you not view all of us as monsters," [name withheld], a former teacher convicted of second-degree rape involving a 17-year-old male, told a House committee last week as it considered tougher laws against sex offenders.

Oklahoma's sex offender registry includes those convicted of a broad swath of crimes, not just those against children, but some lawmakers argue the very nature of those crimes makes it imperative to crack down on offenders.

Rep. Leslie Osborn

"I will always vote to be the one that's tough on crime," Rep. Leslie Osborn, R-Mustang, argued recently during debate over a bill to impose mandatory prison sentences for those who fail to register. "I want us to remember that the people that are registering here include people who are rapists, child molesters. These are people that have done heinous crimes to members of our communities."
- What a crock!  If they wanted to be "tough" on crime, then they'd require all ex-felons to register on a public shaming hit-list, and to have similar residency laws!  Sex offenders are just their way of helping themselves look "tough" to the people, while actually doing nothing to prevent or deter crime.  And, not all of those on the registry are rapist or child molesters.  Just wait until your son or daughter get slammed with the label!

[name withheld] testified before legislators as the House considers laws that would keep sex offenders out of state parks and prohibit them from going to schools unescorted if their victim was younger than age 18 — rather than 13 as the current law reads. It passed on a 12-1 vote.

"I've tried to stay out of the legislative fight for the past few years because it's become so depressing for me and my family, until these bills hit the floor this year," [name withheld] told the unsympathetic panel. "If bills like this pass, I will not be allowed to go to my nieces' and nephews' birthday parties. I will not be allowed to go walking in the park with my husband. I will not be allowed to pick up my children when their sick unless I have a chaperone with me. That's impossible."

Rep. Fred Jordan

Rep. Fred Jordan, R-Jenks, said his vote in favor of the escort bill was easy to defend.

"The whole motive of that bill is to further protect children, and that's got to be our No. 1 concern, and that's my concern every time I vote on one of these pieces of legislation," Jordan said.

Two years ago, sex offenders testified against a bill that would have chased them from an Oklahoma City trailer park. When the bill passed, many moved to tents on the park's outskirts. In the state Supreme Court, justices are currently considering whether it is legal to make registry laws retroactive. Two plaintiffs in the case claim they are exempt from the state's sex offender registry rules because their crimes pre-date the creation of the registry in 1989.
- If you are obeying the Constitution, then it's not legal, it's an unconstitutional ex post facto law.

The American Civil Liberties Union says recidivism rates for sex offenders are much lower for sex offenders (slightly more than 5 percent) than for those convicted of robbery, burglary or larceny (above 70 percent). The figures are from the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics.

"We also know these bills and current statutes make us less safe as a society by marginalizing those that have to go on the sex offender registry," said Ryan Kiesel, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Oklahoma chapter.

[name withheld], who was convicted of lewd or indecent proposal to a child in Pittsburg County, said he's met several offenders through his court-ordered counseling sessions that can't find work and become homeless because of the current restrictions. He said a law passed a few years ago that requires the words "Sex Offender" to be printed on their driver's licenses also is a problem.

"Let's say you're applying for a job. You can't escape it. I know a guy who got beat up in a convenience store because when he was ID'd for a pack of cigarettes," [name withheld] said. "It's the scarlet letter of our time, for God's sake. It really is. For some people, one little tiny mistake can blow up their whole life."
- Maybe ex-offenders need to start suing those who pass these laws for harassment, bodily harm, etc? If that is possible? They probably have immunity from their actions, which is insane in our opinion.

---

TX - Conservative Think Tank Supports Less Sex Offender Disclosure

Original Article

04/03/2013

By Emily DePrang

Texas lawmakers have filed more than a dozen bills this session that augment or add restrictions to the behavior of registered sex offenders, of whom Texas now has over 72,000. That’s normal—sex offenders don’t have a lot of constituent clout and making them list their status on a driver’s license or social media profile is a low-cost, low-risk way to look tough on crime.

What’s unusual is that the Texas Senate recently passed a bill that would remove employer information from the public registry. Senate Bill 369 (PDF) is by Houston’s Democratic state senator John Whitmire. Right now, you can look up an offender’s name, race, height, weight, hair color, eye color, shoe size, home address, birth date, and employer name and address. Dropping the last two wouldn’t be for the good of offenders, but of the businesses they work for.

“The employer didn’t commit an offense,” says Marc Levin, director of the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s Center for Effective Justice. “There’s a lot of concern about employers being harassed, vigilantism. Certainly there are a lot of studies showing that families of sex offenders have been subject to harassment and even criminal activity.”

Levin says the House version of the bill, HB 879 (PDF), also met enthusiastic support in committee.

“The risk that a sex offender may reoffend is actually lower if they’re employed,” Levin says, so along with protecting employers, the reform may increase public safety.

But that kind of pragmatism is a slippery slope toward reality-based policy. No research has ever suggested, let alone proved, that public sex offender registries prevent crime or reduce recidivism. (Check out “Life On the List,” our cover story from last June, for extensive documentation of what the list doesn’t do.) And research does show that the perennially popular laws restricting offenders’ movement, employment, schooling and home hinder successful reintegration.

The registry continues to swell, and all that monitoring takes public money and law enforcement time and attention. So will the TPPF, a free-market think tank that has supported a variety of right-on-crime reforms, ever oppose the registry itself?

“We haven’t gotten into the question of whether we should have one,” Levin says. “But there is a concern that the registry encompasses too many people that aren’t predators to be effective.”

---

MO - Editorial: Time to retool sex offender registry

Original Article

04/02/2013

Replacing Missouri’s punitive and catch-all sex offender registry with a more selective list is the right way for the state to go in addressing a serious problem.

Two bills (HB-462, HB-589) that are working their way through the Missouri Legislature seek to replace the current registry, which does not give offenders in most cases an opportunity to be taken off it, with registries that would ultimately give many offenders on the list that chance.

One of the problems with the current registry is that it does not discriminate among the types of offenses that result in a person being scarred for life with the sex offender tag.

As a result, it diminishes public perception of the severity of the crimes committed by serious offenders by lumping them in with people who have committed less severe crimes.

One example of lesser crimes is the so-called “Romeo and Juliet” offender, which generally refers to older teenagers who had consensual sex with a minor, usually a younger teen. The Missouri Highway Patrol, which manages the sex offender registry, has calculated that about 631 people would immediately be removed from the list if one of the bills, sponsored by Rep. Don Phillips, R-Kimberling City, was signed into law.

The sex offender registry is not intended to be a blotch forever on the reputations of such people. The point of the registry is to allow government authorities — and citizens — to keep track of the residence and activities of sex offenders, including those who have completed their criminal sentences, to make it more difficult for them to repeat their crimes.
- But statistics already show that ex-sex offenders already have a very low re-offense rate and are not likely to commit another related crime, if you'd look, and the online registry is nothing more than an online hit-list for vigilantes to use to target for harassment ex-offenders, their families and even innocent people, which many examples can be seen here.

Video Link

The information on the registry is available to the general public via a website maintained by the Highway Patrol. It includes the offender’s current address, place of employment, type of vehicle registered to him (an overwhelming number of offenders are hims) and the person’s criminal history.

Critics say the registry net is cast too wide, and they advocate the scalpel rather than the meat ax approach. Being listed on the registry can ruin people’s lives, making it difficult for them to get jobs, more likely to be harassed by neighbors and co-workers or to be targeted by law enforcement authorities.

An academic in the field, Wayne Logan, a professor at Florida State University law school, says there isn’t even agreement about whether registries serve as the deterrents they are intended to be.

Mr. Logan, who also has written a book about criminal registries and notification laws, was quoted in a front-page story in Monday’s Post-Dispatch by reporters Virginia Young and Stephen Deere. He said a recent study shows that while registries can serve as a deterrent, they can also promote recidivism by making life too difficult for the offender.

“They can never get out from that shadow,” Mr. Logan said.

The registry can be used to subject listed offenders to housing restrictions and parole or probation restrictions that don’t apply to others, such as being in the presence of minors, living in proximity to schools or day care centers, owning objects of interest to minors or use of the Internet.

Another reason to retool the registry is the cost of maintaining it.

Mr. Phillips, a retired highway patrolman, said his bill would keep minor offenders off the registry and would allow nearly a third of about 14,000 people currently on it to petition for removal within 20 years.

His bill has support from the Missouri Sheriffs Association, the American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri and Missouri Kids First, a statewide organization that works to prevent child abuse.

County sheriffs who support the bill say they have limited resources to track the growing list of offenders and that by cutting back on the number of those on the list, they would be better able to concentrate on dangerous offenders.

The other bill that also has made it out of the House Crime Prevention and Public Safety Committee is sponsored by Rep. Dave Hinson, R-St. Clair. While it shares some of the same ideas for redesigning the registry, it is more far-reaching and would give all offenders a chance to petition for removal.

It also would require mental health exams and be too expensive to administer. Mr. Phillips’ bill, HB462, is the better approach.

While there seems to be legislative consensus that the sex offender registry needs work, the method of getting there has not yet been determined. With the state’s criminal code also in need of reform for many of the same reasons, it’s heartening to see that the Legislature realizes the blunt approach to crime isn’t always the best approach.

See Also:

• Missouri considering changing its sex offender registry rules

---

MO - Missouri Sex Offender Registry Changes Proposed

Original Article

Video available at the link above.

03/27/2013

By Kevin Schwaller

SPRINGFIELD - Proposals in Jefferson City could let select sex offenders take their names off of Missouri's sex offender registry.

Rep. Don Phillips, R-Kimberling City, Mo., says if his bill passes, more than 1,100 people on the registry would be eligible to take their names off of the list. He says some people simply don't belong on those records.

Phillips gave an example of someone who may be charged after relieving themselves on the side of the road.

We also spoke with the mother of a sex abuse victim. KOLR10 News concealed her identity to protect that victim. She is referred to for the purposes of this story as "Janette".

"We started our journey in 2011," says Janette.

That journey in court is one no mother wants to travel.

"He was five years old when it happened."

Janette says her brother-in-law sexually abused her little boy. It took her son years of growing to admit what happened.

"The ten years that he had kept in silence and what had happened to him, you know, no amount of jail time would have made that up," Janette says.

Now, Janette wants to be sure the man who pleaded guilty to the misconduct won't get a chance to leave the sex offender registry.

"We are in desperate need of reforming our sex offender registry. We have hundreds and hundreds of people that don't belong on there," Phillips says.

Rep. Phillips is sponsoring a bill in the Missouri House. It would create a tiered system for gauging offenses. Some offenders won't have to register. Others will have to wait ten or 25 years to try to petition for removal from the registry. The worst offenders generally stay on for life.

Let's go back to Janette. She says the time in court wore on the family. They settled with a plea deal: two counts of misdemeanor sexual misconduct. She says the original charges were statutory sodomy and molestation.

The perpetrator got two consecutive nine month sentences. Now, Janette believes this bill could eventually let him off of the registry.

"The main reason we wanted to do this is so there couldn't be another hidden monster in a family, all you would have to do is Google his name and see that he was a registered sex offender," says Janette. "And that's what we wanted to make sure, is that it didn't happen to another family."

If this law passes -- based solely on the charges -- Janette's brother-in-law could petition to be taken off the registry in ten years.

Janette says she also wouldn't want victims to have to relive the experiences by having to appear again when someone is trying to be removed from the registry.

Phillips says victims would not have to come forward again in his bill.

The house has considered several similar proposals in the past and there are more this year.

The bill we examined (HB 462) has cleared one committee and still must make it through the Missouri House rules committee before going to the house floor.

See Also:

• HB-462 (PDF): Changes the requirements for the state sex offender registry
• HB-589 (PDF): Changes the laws regarding sexual offender registration and classification
• HB-624 (PDF): Changes the laws regarding sexual offender registration

---

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

---

OK - House panel eyes sex offender penalties

Original Article

03/19/2013

By SEAN MURPHY

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - Convicted sex offenders who fail to register with law enforcement would face a minimum of five years in prison under a bill (SB-933) approved by a House committee on Tuesday over the objections of opponents who say it will only make state prison overcrowding worse.

The House Judiciary Committee voted 10-3 for the bill, which already passed the Senate and now heads to the full House for consideration.

"Most people who have to register should realize that's pretty serious," said Rep. Leslie Osborn, R-Mustang, the House sponsor of the bill. "It's not like forgetting to pick up milk on your way home."

Judges currently can sentence offenders to a maximum of five years in prison for failing to register, but Osborn said most receive 90 days and are released with electronic monitoring.

The bill initially would have required a minimum of 10 to 15 years in prison for failing to register, but was amended to include a minimum of five years.

Still, opponents argued the bill takes away the discretion of a judge to be more lenient with low-level sex offenders who have essentially committed a technical infraction.

"What we're doing is wholly unnecessary," said Rep. Cory Williams, D-Stillwater. "We're basically re-prosecuting them for the heinous crime that they were convicted of committing before. Let's not forget they were already punished for that crime."
- Of course it is, but she sees a way to help herself look "tough" on crime, so as usual, she jumps at the opportunity.

An analysis of the bill by House researchers indicates 257 people were convicted of failure to register as a sex offender last fiscal year. Of those, 219 were sentenced to an average of 3.6 years in prison. Based on the 10-year minimum, the projected fiscal impact to the state's prison system was about $3.6 million annually. According to the Department of Corrections, there currently are more than 1,100 delinquent sex offenders who have failed to register with authorities.

Oklahoma had the nation's fifth highest incarceration in 2011, the most recent for which data was available, according to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics.

David Nichols, the founder and president of Hand Up Ministries that helps convicted sex offenders transition back into society, said the group is relentlessly targeted by lawmakers looking to score political points and tout their "tough-on-crime" credentials. He said convicted sex offenders already are prohibited from living in most urban areas because of restrictions that include churches, daycares, schools, parks and playgrounds.

"They're more than piling on them," said Nichols, who has about 135 sex offenders living at a mobile home park in south Oklahoma City. "They don't want them to have a chance of staying out of prison."

"I'll be honest with you, I trust the politicians a lot less than these guys here."

---

CA - Requesting Plaintiffs for Civil Rights Suit in Santa Ana, CA

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.

The following is an appeal by the California Reform Sex Offender Laws organization. We are trying to get plaintiffs for a civil rights suit against the Santa Ana Police Department. The organization president has approved the following text for release:

Are you a registered sex offender in the city of Santa Ana, California? The staff at California Reform Sex Offender Laws would like to contact you to discuss your experiences during your annual registration in the city of Santa Ana including but not limited to requirement to wear a prison uniform, registration in the city jail, and/or inability to leave during the registration process.

Requirements:

1. Required to register on California Megan's Law (PDF) as per California Statute 290
2. Required to register at the Santa Ana Police Department

ALL contacts with California RSOL are confidential and will NOT be reported to any other authority nor entity at ANY stage of our interviewing process. To arrange for an interview, please call 805-896-7854 or send a message through our contact form on our website contact page. You can also mail us at the following address:

CA RSOL

8721 Santa Monica Blvd., Box 855

Los Angeles, CA 90069-4507

Help make the city of Santa Ana safer for registrants. Thank you.

Please call 805-896-7854 if you wish to verify before publication. Thanks.

---

DC - Supreme Court to review sex offender registration law

Original Article

01/11/2013

The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to decide whether the government can require a former federal sex offender to register a change of address even after he had served his sentence and been unconditionally freed from custody.

In a brief order, the court agreed to hear the government's appeal of a July 2012 decision overturning the conviction of Air Force veteran [name withheld] for violating the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act of 2006.

SORNA provides what the U.S. Department of Justice calls a comprehensive set of minimum standards for sex offender registration and notification, and was designed to close potential gaps and loopholes.

While in the military, [name withheld] at age 21 had consensual sex with a 15-year-old. He was sentenced in 1999 to three months in prison, which he served, and was no longer under federal control by the time SORNA was enacted.

In August 2007, he registered with authorities in El Paso, Texas, as a sex offender but never updated his registration after moving later that month to San Antonio. [name withheld] was later apprehended, and sentenced to one year in prison after a bench trial.

But the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the conviction and found the registration requirement unconstitutional.

Congress, it said, was not entitled to assert "unending criminal authority" over [name withheld] because of his earlier criminal sexual activity.

The Justice Department appealed, saying Congress acted within its power in subjecting [name withheld] to the SORNA registration requirement. It also said voiding of an "important" act of Congress warranted the court's review.

A decision is expected by the end of June.

The case is U.S. v. [name withheld], U.S. Supreme Court, No. 12-418 (PDF).

---

MA - A murder occurs and instead of punishing just the murderer, Massachusetts punishes the scapegoat (ex-sex offenders)?

Original Article

01/04/2013

By George Brennan

Less than a decade after a Falmouth murder case shined the spotlight on the need for reform of the state's Sex Offender Registry, a monitoring program sparked by the outrage no longer exists — a victim of budget cuts.
- As usual, a murder occurs, so they go after ex-sex offenders instead of murderers!  That is like punishing all thieves for something a serial killer has done.  Yeah, doesn't make much sense, does it?  Sex offenders are nothing more than today's scapegoat!

Now, in the wake of an alleged sex abuse case at an unlicensed day care center in Wakefield, there is a renewed push to reform how sex offenders are classified. [name withheld], whose wife ran the day care business, had previously been classified as a Level I sex offender for a 1989 conviction of assault on a child.

In her inaugural speech Wednesday, Senate President Therese Murray, D-Plymouth, who represents the Upper Cape, said the state's sex offender laws will be one of her legislative priorities.
- Yes of course, she is trying to get elected, or just elected, so what better way to appeal to the sheeple?  This just goes to show you that no matter how many laws you pass, if a person is intent on committing a crime, they will.  These laws are useless and just used by politicians to help them get elected, or to help them look "tough" to the ignorant public.

"With the start of this new session, we will re-examine the criteria for sex offender registration to ensure that we are doing all that we can to protect our children and their families," Murray said after being elected to her fourth term in the Senate's top job.
- No matter what you do, it won't prevent children from being harmed, period!

It was Murray who in 2004 worked with Barnstable County Sheriff James Cummings and Cape and Islands District Attorney Michael O'Keefe after [name withheld], a registered sex offender who had failed to notify law enforcement of his moves as required by law, killed 20-year-old [name withheld] of Falmouth.

Murray pushed for $275,000 to bring a pilot program to the county that made sure sex offenders were classified before leaving prison, Cummings said Thursday. Inmates in state prison were sent to the Barnstable County Correctional Facility in Bourne for the last six to nine months of their sentences, Cummings said, where hearings were held by the Sex Offender Registry Board to classify them as Level I, II or III sex offenders.

While they were still in jail, the sheriff's office and local police teamed up to check out the address where the offender planned to live, Cummings said. They also did periodic checks to make sure the offender hadn't moved without letting law enforcement know, he said.

Officers and sheriff's deputies also checked in with employers periodically, he said.

"It was a great program, and we wanted to expand it, but (the) administration cut funding," Murray said Thursday.

With the funding cut in 2008, the sheriff still holds hearings at the jail for inmates sentenced to Barnstable County, but no longer has the resources to take in all Cape sex offenders from other jails, he said. The department can no long afford to do the routine checks, Cummings said.

"We pretty much had a thumb on where they lived and worked," he said. "We don't do that anymore either."

Murray said she would like to see funding for that program restored and to tighten up controls that allow suspects like [name withheld] to slip through the cracks.

"You have to fund it," she said. "It's a public safety issue. We put money in other areas. We need to put money into this."

Murray would also like the criteria for each level to be reviewed because she doesn't believe [name withheld] should ever have been classified as a Level I. The Sex Offender Registry Board also should have the ability to review allegations brought against a sex offender, even if it doesn't result in a court conviction, she said.
- It doesn't matter what someone classifies an offender, it will never be enough.  If they commit another crime, politicians will say, "See, the program isn't working and he/she shouldn't have been a tier 1," just like this politician is now screaming about.  They will not be satisfied until all criminals are in prison for life and never let out, but even then I'm sure they'll find something else to be dissatisfied about.

The state Department of Corrections also must begin review of sex offenders earlier to ensure that none are released before they are classified, something that's already required by law but isn't always being done because of a backlog of cases, Murray said.

Charles McDonald, a spokesman for the Sex Offender Registry Board, said the agency has cut the classification time in half and only a "small number" are released without being classified.

Classifications have to be able to withstand judicial review, he said.

Murray said a small working group is already looking at possible reforms, noting that the Patrick administration, House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester, are all on board with making changes.

The registry board supported a comprehensive bill filed by Gov. Patrick in 2012 that would have allowed the posting of Level II offenders and the release of Level I offenders upon request, McDonald said. He's hopeful some of those reforms will be considered this year.

Cummings said he was pleased to hear Murray once again leading the charge for tighter controls on sex offenders, though he acknowledged being frustrated that it takes high profile incidents like the Wessner murder and the alleged abuse of babies in Wakefield to trigger change.

"It's like crisis management seems to be the way government works," Cummings said.

Having Murray behind it will help, he said. "That's where the money is going to come from."

O'Keefe, the district attorney who is president of the state association of district attorneys for the coming year, met briefly with Murray during a visit to the Statehouse on Thursday.

"We haven't seen any proposals or discussed any details, but that would be a welcome initiative that she's undertaking," O'Keefe said.

---

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

---

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.

---

NM - Officials may seek sex offender registry change

Original Article

12/11/2012

By BARRY MASSEY

SANTA FE - Republican Gov. Susana Martinez and Democratic Attorney General Gary King, who are likely political adversaries in the 2014 gubernatorial election, may find common ground in trying to change New Mexico's sex offender registration law in response to a recent ruling (PDF) by the state's highest court.

At issue is whether out-of-state sex offenders must register in New Mexico for the crimes they committed in other states.

The state Supreme Court ruled last week that a Las Cruces man can withdraw his guilty plea to a felony for not registering as a sex offender after moving to New Mexico in 2006. Under state law, offenders must register with law enforcement if they've been convicted of certain sex crimes in New Mexico or the equivalents of those crimes in other states.

The court sent the case back to the district court in Dona Ana County, saying there wasn't enough evidence to determine if [name withheld]'s sex offense in California was the same as a New Mexico sex crime requiring registration. [name withheld] had been required to register as a sex offender in California for a misdemeanor conviction of "annoying or molesting" a child.

The governor and attorney general are considering asking the Legislature next year to clarify registration requirements for out-of-state sex offenders who move to New Mexico. Spokesman for Martinez and King said their offices haven't yet developed specific proposals.

Read the entire article here

Video Link

---

IN - State Sex Offender Registry Differs From Federal Guidelines

Original Article

12/07/2012

By Rachel Hartog

Three recent cases in Indiana reveal a nuance of the state’s sex offender registry that is different when compared to federal guidelines.

Indiana’s constitution does not require sex offenders who were convicted prior to the creation of the registry in 1994 to register now, because those cases are considered “ex post facto,” or after the fact. However, the U.S. Supreme Court’s guidelines do not consider sex offender convictions ex post facto and say that any offender should be currently registered. It is a policy many other abide by, making Indiana’s guidelines rare.
- The US Constitution also forbids ex post facto laws, but the corrupt government ignore the Constitution.

Attorney Kristin Mulholland defended one case where the offender committed an act in Illinois before the registries were in place, but now lives in Indiana where he has not been required to register.

“Now Illinois passed a law making it so that he would have to register, and under Illinois law, they decided that it’s not ex post facto as to sex offenders having to register,” Mulholland says. “So there’s the difference between the ways Illinois looks at its constitution and the way Indiana looks at its constitution. Indiana provides broader protection its citizens under its constitution.”

While the sex offender registry policy will not be changed in regards to ex post facto cases, Avon State Representative Greg Steuerwald is currently working on legislation requiring offenders to register in each new county they travel to within 72 hours of their arrival.

“These changes are very necessary,” he says. “They’re going to make the registry much more effective. It’s going to enable law enforcement to keep track of offenders better and it’s going to better advise the public in general.”

Steuerwald says a recent study revealed loopholes in the registry that the new law would fix. He plans to introduce his bill when the legislation session convenes next month.

---

NE - Nebraska high court asked to rule on sex offender case

Original Article

12/04/2012

By MARGERY A. BECK

OMAHA (AP) — The Nebraska Supreme Court will again weigh whether a trial court unfairly ordered a Nebraska man to register as a sex offender.

In January, the state's high court ruled that a Buffalo County District Court had violated the due process rights of 32-year-old [name withheld], of Wilcox.

[name withheld] had been accused of fondling his ex-girlfriend's young son in 2009 and was initially charged with child sexual assault, but pleaded no contest in 2010 to misdemeanor assault for threatening the boy.

Trial judges can order someone convicted of non-sex-based offenses to register as a sex offender if there's evidence the person committed a sex offense. But the state's high court said in January that the lower court relied only on prosecutors' assertion that [name withheld] had committed a sex offense.
- That is like convicting someone of murder because you suspect they did it, even if there is no evidence and even after a person was acquitted or never went to court, it's unconstitutional and an abuse of power.  If they were never convicted of a sex crime, then it should not be on their record at all!

The high court upheld [name withheld]'s third-degree assault conviction and sentence of probation, but it ordered the trial court to reconsider the part of the sentence requiring him to register as a sex offender. Specifically, the lower court was instructed to consider all of the evidence presented at an earlier evidentiary hearing to determine whether [name withheld] had sexual contact with the boy.

In March, the lower court again found that [name withheld] did have sexual contact with the boy and must register as a sex offender, which would require him to report where he's living and follow other requirements. [name withheld] appealed.

[name withheld]'s attorney argued to the Nebraska Supreme Court on Monday that the lower court abused its discretion by finding that [name withheld] had sexual contact with the child.

[name withheld]'s attorney, Michael Synek, noted the lack of physical evidence of sexual abuse and pointed to an investigating police officer's report in which the officer said he suspected the boy's mother might have coached the boy. Synek also argued that the boy was not a credible witness, because he reported the sexual abuse only after [name withheld] reportedly refused to give the boy or his mother $150.

"In this case, the state had the burden to prove that sexual contact occurred between [name withheld] and (the boy)," Synek wrote in a brief submitted to the Nebraska Supreme Court. "The state relied exclusively upon the uncorroborated allegations of an 11-year-old boy to produce that firm belief or conviction. In light of [name withheld]'s consistent denials and the evidence that made (the boy's) report somewhat suspect, the evidence did not clearly and convincingly provide grounds to produce a firm belief that sexual contact had occurred."

Assistant Attorney General Nathan Liss countered that while prosecutors did not have physical evidence of sexual abuse, the abuse allegation was corroborated by the boy's consistent statements to witnesses and authorities. The fact that the boy had been exhibiting inappropriate sexual behavior — such as exposing himself and touching other children — also indicated he had been abused by [name withheld], Liss said.
- So much for proving something beyond a reasonable doubt!  All they need now is an accusation and you're life is over!  Just remember that when they come for you.

Liss also said that [name withheld]'s argument that prosecutors' witnesses lacked credibility is a matter only for the trial court and outside the scope of review the high court can consider.

The state Supreme Court will issue an opinion at a later date.

---

IL - Suit: Police refuse to register homeless sex offenders

Original Article

If this is true and the police are refusing to register them, then threatening to arrest them, that is a crime in-of-itself.  I hope these people win and get enough money, if any, to not be homeless anymore.

12/06/2012

Two homeless sex offenders are suing the City of Chicago for refusing to register them for lack of a permanent address, claiming their non-registration make them subject to arrest.

[name withheld] and [name withheld] claim they have been arrested or face arrest because Chicago Police refuse to register them as sex offenders because they are homeless. The suit, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court, claims state statute allows the city to register them, but police refuse.

The suit claims a sex offender is required to register at police headquarters and provide a current photo, address, list of schools attended, place of employment, phone numbers, e-mail address, IM and chat identities, and any Internet sites maintained.

By law, local law enforcement has the right to waive registration fees and make homeless sex offenders check in weekly, rather than provide an address, the suit said.

[name withheld] was released from prison Nov. 19, 2012, and attempted to register the next day, but Chicago Police refused because he did not have a permanent address, the suit said. He said he tried to register at his son’s address but it is too close to a park, and he was unable to find a homeless shelter that would take a sex offender.

Illinois State Police classified [name withheld] as a non-compliant sex offender on Dec. 3 and he is now subject to arrest, the suit said.

[name withheld] was released from prison in January 2011 and hospitalized a short time later following a mild heart attack, the suit said. He attempted to register upon release from the hospital, but was told Chicago Police do not register the homeless and he had three days to find a shelter and pay a $100 fee.
- This is extortion in my book.

He was unable to do so and was arrested in July 2011, the suit said. He remains in Cook County Jail.

The suit asks a judge to certify the suit as a class action, create procedures to register homeless sex offenders in Chicago, and award monetary damages.

A spokesman for the city Department of Law was not immediately available for comment.

---