NE - Nebraska continues to change the rules and punishing families & children

Video Link

---

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

---

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

---

FORM - Legislative Intent - Statements made by current and past legislature

Direct link to the form

We are wanting to start keeping track of when current or past legislature say something which shows the intent of the sex offender registry, residency and other laws are about punishment.

So if you know of any such article, please fill out the form below. We do not track your name, email or anything else. It's strictly for documenting the above.

NOTE: Please make sure you click the link below to see if someone has already logged the statement you are wanting to log.

---

---

FL - ARK volunteer taken off sex-offender list

Original Article

01/10/2013

By Jen Horton

[name withheld] — who came to the public’s attention because of his wife’s role at the Animal Rescue Konsortium (ARK) in DeLand — has been removed from the Florida Sexual Offender/Predator Public Registry.

Critics of the ARK shelter, which was raided by the DeLand Police Department Nov. 8, complained that one of the shelter volunteers — [name withheld] — was a registered sex offender.

Just two weeks before the raid, on Oct. 26, [name withheld] had been arrested by DeLand police and charged with failure to register properly as a sex offender. He had listed himself on police records as a transient, but had stayed at least occasionally at ARK.

[name withheld] and his wife were homeless, and ARK president Maggi Hall had given them permission to live at the ARK shelter in exchange for caring for the 126 animals on the property.

After the raid, the [name withheld]'  situation was dire, as they had few possessions and no home, and had difficulty finding work. Daniel [name withheld]’s status as a registered sex offender made hard times even harder.

However, then [name withheld] learned the dates of his conviction on sex charges predated the enactment of the Florida registry.

[name withheld] was convicted of sexual assault in Michigan in 1996 when he was 22 years old. He said the charges had been brought by a former girlfriend.

Florida’s Public Safety Information Act, which requires sex offenders to be registered and their addresses published on a state website, did not go into effect until 1997.
- So anybody whose crime was before 1997 needs to hire a lawyer to get off the registry.

[name withheld] consulted with an attorney, who helped him have his name removed from the sex-offender registry. He’s happy to lose the label.

“I can live anywhere I want to,” [name withheld] said.

Most jurisdictions restrict where registered sex offenders can live. The ARK shelter is among locations in DeLand that are off-limits as a sex offender’s residence.

[name withheld] said he now has a good job, and he and his wife have a car and a new place to live in Orange City.
- This just goes to show you, the registry is punishment.  It made this man and his wife homeless, and when he was removed from the registry, he now is able to get on with his life.

“Things are going good for us,” he said. “I’m happy.”

Depending on exactly where they live, the [name withheld]’ trouble with [name withheld]'s past conviction may not be over.

In 2012, Orange City adopted a residency-restriction ordinance that applies to all sex offenders, whether or not they are listed on the state registry, and whether they were convicted in Florida or another state.
- And it's another unconstitutional ex post facto law that should be repealed!

---

IN - Supreme Court removes Hammond man from sex offender list

Original Article

All states have the issue of "ex post facto" laws in their constitutions, so why aren't all states finding the same?

01/10/2013

By Dan Carden

INDIANAPOLIS - The Indiana Supreme Court on Thursday ordered a Hammond man removed from the state's sex offender registry after determining the law requiring him to register for life imposes an unconstitutional retroactive punishment (PDF).

[name withheld], 52, pleaded guilty to child solicitation in 1997 after seeking a sexual encounter with a 9-year-old Lake County girl, according to court records.

He served 18 months in prison, 18 months on probation and was required by a 1996 law to register as a sex offender for 10 years.

In 2006, the Republican-controlled General Assembly changed the sex offender registration law to require adult sex offenders who victimized children younger than 12 to register for life.

[name withheld] argued in his appeal to the state's high court that extending his registration period from 10 years to life was an additional retroactive punishment and prohibited by the "ex post facto" clause of the Indiana Constitution. Ex post facto is Latin for "after the fact."

In a 5-0 decision, the state Supreme Court agreed.

Writing for the court, Chief Justice Brent Dickson, a Hobart native, weighed the punitive effects of lifetime registration and determined that as applied to [name withheld]'s low-level felony conviction it is additional punishment and therefore unconstitutional.

Republican Attorney General Greg Zoeller, who sought to keep [name withheld] on the sex offender rolls, is reviewing the court's decision, said spokesman Bryan Corbin.

Corbin said Zoeller expects to meet with state legislators to help draft an update to Indiana's sex offender registration law in the wake of several similar recent court rulings.

---

IA - Face recognition could be next tool in efforts to track sex offenders

Original Article

12/15/2012

By MIKE WISER

DES MOINES — Each of the more than 5,600 registered sex offenders in Iowa could soon have their photos digitized and saved to a database that law enforcement officials could then match to everything from security camera images to Facebook photos with a few mouse clicks.

The Iowa Department of Public Safety is in the middle of a program to equip every Iowa sheriff’s department with an electronic signature pad, laptop computer and digital camera that can support the high-resolution data to feed through facial recognition software.

“Biometrics is really coming up to play a big part in law enforcement and investigations and things like that,” said Terry Cowman, special agent in charge of the state’s sex offender registry program.

“What’s interesting about facial rec is it is kind of the future of where we’re at.”

He has about $110,000 to pay for the hardware through a federal grant. Now he’s seeking another $180,000 to pay for the software and training that would allow the state to digitize roughly 10,000 photos, but he won’t receive word on the grant until spring.

Still, the move to digitize and analyze faces of sex offenders has some concerned about what comes next.

“You always start with sex offenders because nobody is going to stick up for sex offenders,” said Rep. Chip Baltimore, R-Boone, a lawyer who chairs the House Judiciary committee. “The question is where it goes from there.”
- So this idiot, who is one of those who are running this country, is admitting this?  Well, we all knew this is how they feel, but he's admitting it.  If he's willing to do this to one group, I'm sure he'll be more than happy to eliminate the rights of other groups as well, as long as it doesn't affect himself of course.

Spreading

This is what it's becoming!

Facial recognition software is a key part of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s $1 billion Next Generation Identification program and the reason Facebook can suggest a photo ID on a mobile phone upload.

More than a decade ago, the city of Tampa, Fla., piloted a facial recognition system that scanned faces of people in crowds and compared them to photos of criminals in their database. The program ran for about two years and was scrapped in 2003.

“Sex offenders don’t have the same rights as other people because they already have been convicted of a crime,” said Ben Stone, executive director of the Iowa branch of the American Civil Liberties Union.
- So what about all the other criminals who have also been convicted of a crime?  And it appears the people who are suppose to be standing up for the rights of people, the ACLU, isn't!

Dealing with convicts makes it easier for government to get around civil liberties concerns than if it, say, wanted to run a recognition scan on everyone who had their picture taken for a driver’s license or other form of state photo identification, Stone said.
- Oh, it's coming.  Eventually everybody will be scanned and have their DNA taken from birth.  Wait and see.

Chris Sumner, co-founder and secretary of the U.K.-based Online Privacy Foundation, focuses most of his work on the type of data people voluntarily share online through applications such as Facebook and Twitter and how that data is repackaged and sold.

See Also:

• Move to digitize Iowa sex offender mug shots raises privacy concerns
• Iowa implementing face recognition program to track sex offenders

Read the entire article here

---

Sex-Offender Laws Doomed by Flawed Reasoning

Paul Appelbaum

Original Article

11/16/2012

By Aaron Levin

How to prevent convicted sex offenders from committing further crimes is a policy dilemma that has been met with punishing legal responses.

Laws and policies intended to control sex offenders are ineffective, expensive, unenforceable—and unlikely to be changed.

“These laws are preventive and punitive in intent and effect, motivated by a desire to contain but not to treat,” said Paul Appelbaum, M.D., the Dollard professor of psychiatry, medicine, and law and director of the Division of Law, Ethics, and Psychiatry at Columbia University. Appelbaum spoke at APA’s 2012 Institute on Psychiatric Services in New York in October.

Sentencing of convicted sex offenders underwent a major change about 30 years ago, he explained. For most of the 20th century, sex offenders were given sentences of indeterminate length in hopes that they would become rehabilitated. With little evidence of efficacy using that approach, courts in the 1980s switched to “determinate sentencing,” with fixed prison terms.

“The change went from punishing the offender to punishing the crime,” said Appelbaum.

In addition, “sexually violent predator” statutes were passed in many states, reflecting a state of panic in the 1990s about sex crimes against children. They mandated civil commitment “in a treatment facility” once offenders had completed their prison sentences. Treatment might be offered, but was voluntary. As of 2010, 5,300 sex offenders were committed under these statutes.

The process also shifted a new burden onto mental health systems, filling beds needed for other patients and diverting funds from an already under-funded system.

Detention is expensive. A Minnesota study revealed costs of $120,000 annually per offender. Since none of the offenders in the state had been released since the program’s inception in 1994, costs can only go up.

“Still, this system was seen as akin to civil commitment and thus raised fewer constitutional issues,” said Appelbaum. The Supreme Court has upheld the system three times. “But is civil commitment a pretext for preventive detention, and is the mental health system the right place for that?” he asked.

Other Strategies Questioned

Confinement is not the only way that governments have attempted to restrict convicted sex offenders as a means of reducing recidivism.

State and federal laws call for registration of offenders and, as of July 2012, more than 700,000 were registered nationwide.

Community notification laws require that local jurisdictions be alerted to the presence of offenders and the information displayed on a Web site.

“Yet many of these laws cover non-contact offenses, or sex by underage teens, or even offenses by young children,” said Appelbaum. “Offenders are often harassed and find it hard to reestablish their lives, find a job, or receive mental health treatment.”

A third approach in 20 states and hundreds of cities restricts residency and workplace options to points at least 1,000 to 2,000 feet from schools, churches, day-care centers, or even bus stops.

“This has placed entire towns completely off limits,” said Appelbaum. “And is creating sex-offender ghettos a good idea? Maybe it’s better to not have them around each other.”

A study by Appelbaum and Jacqueline Berenson, M.D., found that 92 percent of registered sex offenders in Buffalo, N.Y., and 100 percent of those in Schenectady, N.Y., lived in restricted locations in those cities.

Clearly, these laws are not being enforced, reflecting a choice by police, said Appelbaum.

“The law doesn’t make sense to the police,” he said. “They see it more like jaywalking than homicide.”

Flawed Reasoning Underlies Laws

He listed a number of flaws in the thinking behind registration, notification, and residency laws. They are indiscriminate, based on weak premises, and are likely to be counterproductive, he said.

“For one thing, most sex offenses against children are committed by family members and friends, not by strangers,” he said. “and while the premise of such laws is that sex offenders are likely to re-offend, in fact only 13.4 percent do so, compared to 60 percent of felons in general.”

Although the laws are intended to protect children from sexual predators, many of the offenders did not commit crimes against children. There are no data indicating that they target children near where they live or work—and some anecdotal reports indicate that those are the last places they would commit their crimes.

Also disturbing is the dearth of research on the treatment of sex offenders, especially in the United States, Appelbaum noted.

“Medications like SSRIs, depoprovera, or lupralide are understudied and underutilized,” he said. “Treatment has been dominated by therapists who favor cognitive-behavioral therapy and resist medication.”

“This area is a major challenge for rational policy making, and there is little political support for change,” he said.

Ideally, it might be better not to create a new system but instead keep offenders within the correctional system while beginning treatment soon after they are incarcerated, Appelbaum suggested. A return to indeterminate sentencing might permit many to be released once they had responded adequately to treatment.

An abstract of “A Geospatial Analysis of the Impact of Sex Offender Residency Restrictions in Two New York Counties” by Appelbaum and Berenson in Law and Human Behavior is posted at http://psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1007/s10979-010-9235-3.

---

NY - Council pushes for tougher penalties on sex offenders

Christine Quinn

Original Article

10/09/2012

By IVAN PEREIRA

After a recent string of sexual assaults across the city, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and other elected officials are pushing the state to prevent predators from falling through the cracks.
- A string of sexual assaults?  Really?  We've not heard of them, and we monitor sex crime news on the Internet, daily.  Any proof to this statement?

Although the city can't change the laws governing how sexual predators are charged and supervised after incarceration, it plans to send a resolution to Albany asking state pols to do just that.
- So they can't do it, but they are wanting them to do it anyway?  Bah, who cares about rules and regulations?

Quinn said that too many suspects get lenient sentences or aren't prosecuted strongly enough due to legal loopholes.

"The reason you want larger penalties is, one, to get those criminals off the streets . . . and two to act as a deterrent to criminals," she said.
- This statement proves the laws are punitive, and thus they are unconstitutional.  Nothing will prevent or deter someone who is intent on committing a crime, nothing!

The resolutions unveiled yesterday will be voted on by the City Council in the near future.

The package of five bills include resolutions that call for an increase in the number of times that a convincted sex offenders meet with the police from annually to biannually and expands the time period someone can be charged with as "repeat offender."

Quinn is also pushing the city not to cut its program that aids sex assault victims.

The mayor's office supported Quinn's proposals and noted that funding the city's Sexual Assault Response Team has increased by more than a million dollars since its 2004 inception.

City members of the state legislature said they supported the council's efforts and will work to change regulations in Albany.

"It is important that our laws do not provide loopholes for predators," state Assemb. Aravella Simotas (D-Astoria) said.

See Also:

• Officials plead for harsher sex-crime penalties

---

KS - Kansas Law Treats Sex Offenders Too Harshly

Original Article

It's about time a court did what they are suppose to do, uphold the Constitution. Also, with all the registration fees that are being forced on people, wouldn't that also be a violation of the Eighth amendment?

07/11/2012

By JACK BOUBOUSHIAN

"Even murderers are not treated so harshly" as Kansas handles recidivist sex offenders, the state appeals court ruled (PDF), striking down a law that would impose a life sentence on a sex offender who committed a subsequent felony.

[name withheld] was a teenager when he had multiple sexual encounters with 12-year-old T.C. while staying with the boy's family in 2009.

"[name withheld] apparently cajoled T.C. into having manual and oral contact with [name withheld]'s penis," according to the court. "[name withheld] also had manual contact with T.C.'s penis, behind, and anus."

[name withheld] pleaded guilty in 2010 to aggravated indecent solicitation of a child, and lewd and lascivious behavior. The 19-year-old had no prior criminal history, and had indeed been the victim of sexual abuse some years earlier, so a judge in Saline County sentenced [name withheld] to 44 months probation, with prison time suspended.

[name withheld] entered a treatment program and faced lifetime post-release supervision if he violated probation.

Commission of a crime on post-release supervision would qualify [name withheld] for life sentence without parole.

After the judge rejected [name withheld]'s constitutional challenge to find the lifetime post-release supervision statute, the Kansas Court of Appeals found that law constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

The court noted that the case is unusual because of its hypothetical nature.

"The thrust of [name withheld]'s argument for unconstitutionality, however, goes to the mandatory life-without-parole penalty that would accompany a conviction for a new felony," Judge G. Gordon Atcheson wrote for a three-judge panel.

Since [name withheld] would not have a certain procedural path to challenge the law "at a juncture when the essential historical facts will have become fixed rather than conjectural," the court proceeded under the assumption that [name withheld] violated his probation with some noncriminal action, such as drinking alcohol.

Assuming that the district court then ordered [name withheld] to serve his 44-month sentence, the court then hypothesized what would happen if [name withheld] later committed and pleaded guilty to a low-level felony, such as shoplifting a $1,100 ring, or writing a bad check.

"Although [name withheld] would be in line for probation on the bad check charge, the violation of his post-release supervision would mandate his return to prison for the rest of his life - conservatively, some 25 to 30 years," Atcheson wrote.

By combining two offenses that individually permit probation, the structure imposes lifetime incarceration without possible release, according to the court. "The United States Supreme Court has never upheld that sort of recidivist sentencing scheme," Atcheson wrote.

"The deviation between the customary punishment the legislature has adopted and the result here seems, at least on its face, startlingly anomalous," he added. "A defendant first committing a sexually based person felony and later a low-level nonperson felony, such as theft or forgery, may not be deserving of praise, but the conduct reflects a de-escalation of criminality and antisocial behavior. Why that should result in life behind bars begs an obvious explanation, particularly when the reverse behavior does not have anywhere near the same penal consequences."

Even accounting for the sexual nature of [name withheld]'s first crime does not warrant the punishment at hand, according to the court.

"Escalating punishment for repeat sex offenders culminating in life in prison reflects an orderly and understandable penological response to a serious social and criminal problem," Atcheson wrote. "But imposing the same sentence - the second harshest possible - for a single sex offense followed by any felony conviction looks to be unfocused, especially operating simultaneously with the recidivist statutes targeting repeat sex offenders."

Atcheson noted that "even murderers are not treated so harshly. A person committing successive second-degree murders could be released and then commit a low-level felony without spending the rest of his or her life in prison."

"We, therefore, find lifetime post-release supervision as applied to [name withheld] to be cruel and unusual punishment violating the Eighth Amendment," he concluded.

The decision comes on the heels of a important finding from the Supreme Court involving mandatory life sentences without the possibility of parole for juvenile murderers. A close majority held last month that such sentences constitute a violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

---

Meet The People Who Speak Up For Sex Offenders

Shana Rowan

Original Article

06/25/2012

By Anna North

With Jerry Sandusky just convicted of 45 counts of molesting children, it's a pretty terrible time to be on the side of sex offenders. But a small group of offenders' friends and family are advocating for big changes to the sex offender registry — and experts say they might have a point.

For many, Jerry Sandusky's conviction was a call for stricter laws punishing sex offenders. But for Shana Rowan, it was a reminder of everything she thinks is unjust and ineffective about the current laws. Rowan's fiance is a registered sex offender, and she's part of a small but increasingly vocal group arguing that he and others like him should never have been on a public registry at all.

Rowan told BuzzFeed Shift that when her fiance [name withheld] was twelve and his half-sister was six, he touched her inappropriately (she described it as "kind of like a game of doctor," though she acknowledged that the age difference made it more serious). He was convicted of sodomy, and is now a registered sex offender. When they got together, she researched sex offenders and sex crimes. What she found convinced her that [name withheld]'s crime had been a reaction to abuse he had suffered, that he wouldn't reoffend, and that many registered sex offenders were people "who made a mistake and won't do it again." Now she argues publicly, on her blog and elsewhere, that the sex offender registry in America is "far too bloated to be effective," and that law enforcement should develop "smart assessments" to determine "who really needs to be watched."
- I personally think that we don't need a registry at all.  If someone is so dangerous that they need to be monitored, then maybe they should've been sentenced to a longer time in jail/prison after an expert evaluated them and determined they were dangerous.  Once someone comes out of jail/prison, they are suppose to be able to get on with their lives, not be labeled something for life and treated like an animal.  That, in of itself, creates more stress in a persons life, and with more stress, some are more likely to commit another related or unrelated crime in order to survive.  We do NOT need a registry at all, period.  And if people think we do, then we should have one for all felons, so it's fair for all.

She's not alone. While few people are comfortable advocating for the rights of sex offenders, some friends and family members of registered sex offenders have begun to do just that. On their own or in partnership with groups like Texas Voices and the Sex Offender Solutions and Education Network, they argue for a reduction in the size of the public registry, or for making it available only to law enforcement. And some experts say they're actually right that registries may do more harm than good.
- I think, due to the vigilantism that is rising, yes the registry should be taken offline and used by police only, or better yet, use the existing criminal records database already in existence, then we'd not need to waste millions of dollars on something we don't need in the first place.

The stories of sex offender advocates often aren't comfortable to hear, especially in the wake of the Sandusky trial. Lisa, who asked that only her first name be used, told BuzzFeed her 22-year-old son was currently under investigation by the FBI for downloading child pornography and having sex with an underage girl he met online (she said he believed the girl was over 18). She said her son deserves to be punished, but that he shouldn't have to register for life. Stories of vigilante justice had her concerned for his safety, and for her own. When he gets out of prison, he may live with her, and she lives in a small town with "a bunch of good ol' redneck boys" — if her son is on the registry, they'll have her home address and possibly a description of her car. She now regularly emails her senator and other legislators to try to bring her worries to their attention.

Cynthia Mercado, professor of psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and an expert in sex offender law and policy, says Lisa's concerns are a real issue: in one survey she conducted, nearly half of sex offenders reported being threatened or harassed. And a third of them said someone they lived with had suffered threats, assault, or property damage. In some cases, registration can also lead to the outing of the victim, especially if that victim is a family member.

Mercado also questions whether registration laws really prevent future crimes. She says there's little data showing they keep people safe, and increasing evidence that they might actually "increase, rather than decrease, the risk that sex offenders pose to our communities." That's because registration can keep sex offenders from finding jobs or housing after they've served their time, both of which are "important factors that promote desistance from crime." She adds that being on a sex offender registry can isolate a person from positive social bonds with family and friends that might keep them from offending again.

Laura (not her real name) has experienced some of these effects firsthand. She told BuzzFeed she was eight months pregnant with her daughter when her husband was arrested for attempting to purchase child pornography. She maintains that he is innocent, but he was convicted and placed on the registry. Now, she said, he can't get a job, and suffers from chronic depression.

Laura said "the worst offenders" do belong on a public registry, but that registration should be decided "on a case-by-case basis." As it is, she said, her husband's name and face are on a school district website, and her daughter has to be careful who she's friends with — of those who make registration policy, she said, "they don't care what the collateral damage is."
- Once again, I disagree.  The worst offenders should be in prison longer, and once they come out, after therapy and rehabilitation, then, like everyone else, they should be allowed to do whatever they wish, after probation and/or parole.  Nobody should be branded and punished for life!  People can and do change.  Putting someone on a public registry is basically putting a target for vigilantes on their heads, and that shouldn't be done to anybody, regardless of their crime.

Unsurprisingly, not everyone agrees with her ideas about the registry. Scott Berkowitz, founder of the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network (RAINN) says the public registry is a "useful tool" for both law enforcement and parents. He adds that any loosening of registration requirements "would have its biggest impact on families of small children who look to these registries to help keep them safe."

That's not how Rowan sees it. She says the story of Jerry Sandusky is a perfect example of the failure of the registry. She's glad his victims got "some semblance of justice" with his conviction. But, she says, "the ironic thing is that he was never on the registry, and he will never be on the registry."

Mercado concurs that most sex crimes, rather than being committed by strangers who could be looked up on the registry, "are committed by someone known to the victim or their family" — as Sandusky was. She also notes that not all sex crimes — or sex offenders — are the same: "despite widespread belief to the contrary, most sex offenders do not go on to commit another sex crime." Registry laws, she says, "treat all offenders as highly predatory individuals who target stranger children." But registration requirements that might be appropriate for a predatory serial child molester may not be the right punishment for someone who once committed statutory rape, serious as that offense is.
- Again we see another person saying what the registry's true intent is, PUNISHMENT!

Politically, that may not matter. Richard G. Wright, professor of criminal justice at Bridgewater State College and author of Sex Offender Laws: Failed Policies, New Directions says "hundreds of studies" have shown that "sex offender registries do not reduce reoffending." But they're popular because they "give people the perception that they're safer," and that popularity is unlikely to wane. While perpetrators of some crimes, like sexting or statutory rape where the victim is close in age to the offender, may be removed from registries in some states, he believes the public registry as a whole is here to stay.

For now, sex offenders' rights advocates remain on the fringes of public discourse — Rowan says she faces harsh criticism whenever she speaks out about her views, and both Lisa and Laura have lost friends after their family members' crimes. Indeed, the families of sex offenders may not be the best public advocates for change — in the wake of Dorothy Sandusky's defense of her husband, the average person may not want to hear another wife or mother of a sex offender telling her side. But regardless of whether these spouses and parents have an accurate view of their loved ones' crimes, they may be right about one thing: it's by no means certain that sex offender registries actually keep families safe. And they may put some in more danger.

---

AL - DA Chris Connolly admits the sex offender registry is punishment!

Original Article

06/21/2012

LAUDERDALE COUNTY (WAFF) - [name withheld] pleaded guilty before a Lauderdale County court Thursday to second degree rape.

[name withheld] was charged with one count of rape for sex with a 14-year-old boy. She was arrested in January after officials received tips from parents.

[name withheld] admitted to having sex with multiple teenagers, but only one was under the age of 16 which is the age of consent in Alabama.

Chris Connolly

Officials said [name withheld] volunteered with the junior high basketball team, but was not serving in that capacity or any other role with Wilson School during the time these incidents happened.

[name withheld]'s plea deal came with a recommended sentence of 36 months. She will also have to register as a sex offender.

"She will have to register as a sex offender and that's a big ticket item obviously because that's a life sentence," said Chris Connolly, Lauderdale County District Attorney. "That's the community notification; that's quarterly registration; that's restrictions about employment and where she can live so that's a huge part of this agreement."

Her sentencing date will be July 26 at 1:30 p.m.

---

MD - Captain Mark Waltz of the Brunswick Police Department admits the registry is punishment!

Watch the full video

Officer mentions in the video that "the sex offender registry is the most significant punishment most sex offenders get," admitting it's punishment and therefore unconstitutional! He also says "to teach your children that nobody is suppose to touch them in their bathing suit area," but most sexual crimes occur by someone the victim knows, usually a parent or sibling.

05/03/2012

State Senator, and former Maine Secretary of State, Bill Diamond has written a new book about Child Sexual Abuse, "The Evil and the Innocent." Elizabeth Ward Saxl, director of the Maine Coalition Against Sexual Violence and Captain Mark Waltz of the Brunswick Police Department joined him in the discussion. Plus, a visit to the Maine State Police Computer Crime Lab in Vassalboro.

Book Description:
The potential interest in this book could be measured by the fact that for the past 3 years the online website for the Maine Sex Offender Registry has had 8 million hits each year. The Evil and the Innocent presents a real life and true inside look at the tragedies and suffering of the victims of sexual assault. Those who committed these crimes against the innocent are described and discussed in detail revealing the sadistic fantasies that swirl in the heads of child sex offenders and how these fantasies manifest themselves into reality with total disregard for the pain and suffering inflicted on the victims - the children. These real and actual cases expose heartbreaking and sometimes nauseating facts of sexual assaults and molestations. As difficult as it may be for the reader, these documented details are openly displayed in the book and will stay with the reader for a long time. Seeing the dead eyes and helpless faces of little children who suffered the onslaught of cruel and inhumane acts are necessary ingredients if change is to occur. The book may startle and sicken you because of the cold, hard, facts that until now have been hidden from you. Why? To protect you. Real life suffering must be brought to the light of day so the collective "you" demands that it stop - no matter the cost.

Video Link

---

NJ - Jessica Lunsford Act Passes Unanimously Out of Senate Committee

Original Article

06/04/2012

By Anthony Bellano

The proposed law must now go before a full vote of the assembly, and Brian Rumpf hopes that will happen later this month.

Assemblyman Brian Rumpf called it a “good first step, but there’s still work to do,” following the passage of the Jessica Lunsford Act S-380 (PDF) / S-642 (PDF) by the Senate Law and Public Safety Committee on Monday, June 4. The committee passed the two bills with a unanimous 5-0 vote, according to the Ninth District Legislative Office.

The bills must now go before the state senate as a whole for a vote. Rumpf said he hopes that since the bill moved through the committee in the beginning of the month, it would go before the Senate by the end of June, and that the bill in the Assembly could move at the same pace. Assembly bill A-2027 (PDF) is essentially the same bill as S642.

S380, whose sponsors include Senators Chris Connors and Jeff Van Drew, among others, concerns the "sentencing of sex offenders and persons who harbor them; requires electronic monitoring for certain sex offenders and creates child protection zones."

S642 proposes enactment of the Jessica Lunsford Act, which imposes mandatory term of 25 years to life for aggravated sexual assault against a child under the age of 13 and increases penalties for harboring certain sex offenders.

Nine-year-old Jessica Lunsford was kidnapped, sexually assaulted, and murdered by a registered sex offender in 2005. Lunsford was from Florida, and many states have enacted “Jessica’s Law” since. New Jersey is one of the few remaining that has not.

“This is something we’ve been in favor of for a long time,” Galloway Deputy Mayor Tony Coppola said Monday afternoon.

Galloway resident Anna Jezycki has been vocal about this issue, jump-starting two separate letter writing campaigns to all the state's municipalities and confronting the delegation from the Ninth District, made up of Connors, Rumpf and Assemblywoman DiAnne Gove, during a town hall meet and greet earlier this year.

In March, the Ninth District Delegation began on online petition drive through its website calling for action on this act, as well as other legislation related to sex offenders.

“Our Delegation wholeheartedly supports the Jessica Lunsford Act as a comprehensive effort to expand protections under State law for children and communities as a whole. Strengthening penalties for sexual predators as provided for under this legislation would only further serve the very intent of Megan’s Law by ensuring the punishment fits the heinous nature of the crime,” the Ninth District Delegation said in a statement issued following Monday’s vote. “By any measure, there is strong support among residents living in the Ninth Legislative District for instituting additional safeguards in our judicial system in which law enforcement and the courts can treat sexual offenders in a manner fitting to the danger they represent to the community. Mandatory sentencing is absolutely appropriate and necessary when considering the nature of recidivism that is more common with this form of crime is committed against the most vulnerable persons, our children."

- Once again a politician admitting the laws are all about punishment, not regulations, and she also speaks of the nature of recidivism, which despite what they say, recidivism among ex-sex offenders is one of the lowest of any other criminal, yet they continue to pass draconian laws based on the lie that it's high?

“Our Delegation has a long standing track record of working closely with local governing bodies and community activists on this important public safety issue. Nearly a decade ago, we worked with members of the Beachwood Governing Body to develop legislation to prohibit sexual offenders from living near schools or day care centers. More recently, we worked with residents in Galloway Township in petitioning the Legislature to post the Jessica Lunsford Act and other sexual offender legislation for Committee consideration.”
- And out of all the sex crimes committed in your state, how many of those have occurred near schools or day care centers?  I am willing to bet maybe 5 or less.  It's not the norm, yet they pass laws as if it is.

---

KY - Retired officer (Raymond Kiefer) sentenced for sexual abuse of a 4-year-old - Judge admits registry is punishment for life!

Raymond Kiefer

Original Article

05/01/2012

By Jaimie Weiss

LOUISVILLE (WAVE) - A retired police officer will spend no time in prison after admitting to having inappropriate sexual contact with a family member. Raymond Kiefer, 63, entered the guilty to first degree sexual abuse in December and was sentenced Tuesday.

The defense, prosecution and judge all say the sexual abuse of the 4-year-old was a one-time thing which is why they agreed on a three year prison sentence amended down to five years probation. None of it sits well with the toddler's mother.

"He robbed my daughter of her innocence. He took something from her and made her aware of things she had no business knowing at her age," she said.

Kiefer will also have to register as a sex offender for 20 years and stay at least 1,000 feet away from the girl he used to spend time with.

"This sentence is almost a slap in the face of my daughter," said the victim's mother. "What does it show of her worth to be?"

John Berry, Kiefer's attorney, said his client knows what he did was wrong, which is why he came forward immediately. Berry said he has known Kiefer for decades and he, nor anyone else, would have ever guessed that Kiefer would sexually abuse someone so young and so close to him.

"You can see from his record, we can't say anything bad about his past other than what a stupid thing he did here," said Berry.

Even though Kiefer is a veteran and served as a police sergeant, Judge Mitch Perry tried to assure the family there is nothing unusual about the sentence. Perry said it was the part about registering as a sex offender that was enough for him.

"That is a punishment effectively everyday for the rest of your life, very likely," explained Perry.
- Once again, another judge admits the sex offender registry IS PUNISHMENT!

However, the fact that Kiefer is not going to prison will never be good enough for the 4-year-old girl's family.

Though Kiefer will not be serving any prison time he was taken to Louisville Metro Corrections after the hearing. That was because Perry said even after he was charged, Kiefer was never formally booked.

Video Link

---

GA - Sex offenses on the rise locally

Original Article

I've been monitoring the Georgia registry for a couple years now, based on the info from the GBI web site, and I don't think a lot of what is said below is actually correct. It sounds more like fear-mongering to me, but I could be wrong.

04/14/2012

By Amber Pittman

Are more sexual offenses occurring or are victims reporting more often?

[name withheld] pleaded guilty to molesting his two stepsisters, one was consensual, and the other was by force. [name withheld] was found guilty of the ongoing molestation of a 3-year-old child. And a former college professor pleaded guilty to obscene Internet contact.

In Newton County, and throughout the state, the number of sexual offenses continues to increase. People, predominately men, are increasingly accused and found guilty (or accept plea deals) of sexual offenses, more often than not against children.
- Many have committed crimes not against children, or some may be labeled "child molestation," when the persons crime did not involve touching, or having sex in any form, to a child at all.

It is not unusual to see a charge levied against someone at least once every two weeks in Newton County, which begs the question: Are sexual offenses happening more often or are people simply more willing to report cases?

From 2007 to January 2012, the number of sex offenders in Newton County increased from 125 to 188, while the number of people incarcerated in the state for sex crimes increased from 7,261 to 7,789 during the same period. And the total number of sex offenders in the state (both incarcerated and on the streets) has jumped from 4,694 in 2007 to 21,192 in 2011.
- See the link I provide at the top of this article.  I don't think your information is correct.  Also, when nobody is ever removed from the list, it's common sense it's only going to grow and grow.

"There has been an increase of sex offenders moving into Newton County, and the contributing factor is due to changes in Georgia's sex offender registration law," said Lt. Gwen Freeman-Hightower with the Newton County Sheriff's Office Sex Offender Registration Unit. "Two years ago [the new law] went into effect; this law determines where a sex offender can reside and work. The deciding factor is the sex offender's date of offense rather than conviction. Sex offenders with offense dates prior to June 4, 2003 have no proximity restrictions; so they can live and work wherever they want and the years after have a little more restrictions."
- The new law, HB-1051, actually went into effect in 2006, and has been modified several times due to the many law suits.  And the registry existed way before 2006, it all started in 1996, I believe.

According to a study by the Georgia Department of Corrections, between 1992 and 2007 sexual offenses comprised 11 percent of charges per year.
- Sure would be nice if someone who quotes a "study" would provide a link to said study.  I do not just take someone at their word, I like to see the facts for myself.

"The growth can be partially explained by a national crack down on sexual offenders in the late 1970s. ‘It is OK to tell' was the slogan used to encourage parents to talk to their children about inappropriate touches and to encourage them to report sexual abuses," according to the Georgia Department of Corrections report.

"Instrumental law reforms were also made to foster reporting. The rules of evidentiary admissibility in rape cases, for example, were changed in many states. Now, references to the victim's past could only be made if they were related to the incident in question. Sexual offenses law reforms also included tougher punishments to keep sexual offenders off the streets."
- Once again, another person states the laws are about punishment.  The laws do nothing to prevent crime or protect anybody, and as for keeping them off the streets, it does the exact opposite, it's forcing many people into homelessness, roaming the streets, who would not be homeless if it were not for these draconian laws.

Freeman-Hightower said she believed the number of increased cases may have to do with the increase in reporting the abuse.

"I believe people are reporting more because people have been educated that it's OK to tell and that they, the victims, are not responsible," she said. "To some degree there is [still a stigma attached] because there is a mark of shame and guilt that some victims feel that other's associate (with) the abuse."

And while a stigma may not be attached now to victims of abuse, state statistics show that people abused in the past have a higher rate of sexually aggressive behavior and that roughly 30 percent of adult sex offenders report being sexually abused themselves. Those that abuse boys have higher rates of childhood abuse.

Freeman-Hightower confirmed that out of the 188 registered sex offenders in the county, some had disclosed being a victim of abuse in the past.
- I am not saying this is or isn't true, but was it proven, or are you just accepting someone's word?

Perhaps another reason for the increase is that there are so many more things that are considered sexual offenses now that weren't 20 years ago. Issues with Internet predators were not an issue, and the influx of dating and social media sites and more adults, teens and tweens on those sites opens up a whole new realm of possibilities for predators.

Just like many other crimes, those convicted of sexual offenses do have a relatively high rate of recidivism.
- This is another lie.  There are a ton of studies out there that prove the recidivism rate for children and adults is very low.  And once again, they say something but do not back it up with links to the study they found the "statistics" in.  You can find many studies we have, here.

In Newton County there are just three - 1.5 percent - of the 188 known offenders that have re-offended, according to Freeman-Hightower. The DOC said that as of 2007 the rate of recidivism was 28 percent within three years of release. Nationwide, about 15 to 20 treated sex offenders are likely to re-offend, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. Left untreated, that number jumped to 80 percent.
- Again, another lie.  See this study from the Bureau of Justice that shows the recidivism rate at around 5%.

So what can be done? Many prisons have tried different methods to "cure" offenders.
- In many cases, from what I've heard, offenders do not get treatment while in prison, they are forced to seek treatment outside of prison, using their own money instead of the prison's money.

Research done by the University of London shows that psychological therapy may reduce the rate at which sex offenders re-offend, though it does not cure them. In Georgia, treatment is decided after conviction and in the sentencing of an offender. Treatments range from therapy to chemical castration for serious offenders.

Chemical castration uses hormones to drastically reduce the amount of testosterone levels, which essentially makes the offender impotent. Georgia was one of the first states in the U.S. to legalize this form of treatment. Combined with intense therapy, it has dropped the repeat offender rate in Texas down to 2.2 percent (statistics were not available for Georgia).
- If you ask most ex-offenders and even experts, they will tell you, most of the time a person commits a sexual crime not for sexual purposes, but control.  So chemically castrating them may or may not help.

[name withheld] will serve 25 years behind bars before being eligible for parole. For his victims, the pain doesn't go away. One of the girls he admitted to assaulting has since died; the other is left to pick up the pieces. And [name withheld] is scheduled to be deported back to his homeland of Jamaica after he serves 20 years, but a 3-year-old child may suffer for the rest of her life because of the ongoing molestation she was subjected to at his hands.
- If you always see yourself as a victim, you will be!  I was also molested as a child, and I am not a victim, I am a survivor, and in my case, the crime did not ruin my life and define me, but that is just me.

---

OH - Family Vows To Challenge Sex Offender Ruling

Original Article & Video

04/04/2012

COLUMBUS - A family on Wednesday vowed to challenge a ruling that overturned the mandatory requirement that the person who raped their 6-year-old be branded a sex offender for life.

Tabitha McKee said that a 15-year-old relative raped her son.

The teenager was indicted as a “serious youthful offender,” and a juvenile court judge determined that he would benefit from rehabilitation and decided not to transfer him to adult court, 10TV’s Tanisha Mallett reported.

McKee said that she had hoped the 15-year-old would have been tried as an adult rather than as a juvenile.

“The only reason why I kept my mouth shut and didn’t contest the ruling was because he was ordered to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life,” McKee said.
- So here is further proof that the registry IS punishment.

The teenager appealed the automatic classification as a Tier 3 sex offender, ultimately having his case heard before the Ohio Supreme Court.

The 15-year-old’s attorney argued that mandating a juvenile to register as a sex offender for life amounts to cruel and unusual punishment and violates a young offender’s due process rights, Mallett reported.

Jill Beeler, chief counsel for the 15-year-old, said that the ruling acknowledged that children should not be handled like adults.

“So, this is a good outcome for him,” Beeler said. “He was retained in the juvenile court system. He’s been giving counseling and treatment, and that treatment can be very, very effective.”

During the Ohio Supreme Court hearings, it surfaced that the 15-year-old had a prior sexual offense in Utah before the rape in Ohio.

The Athens County Prosecutor said that there also were previous sexual assault allegations, Mallett reported.

“They are saying that it is cruel and unusual punishment for them to register for the rest of their life, but my son is going to have to deal with this for the rest of his life, my whole family has to deal with it,” McKee said. “Why shouldn’t he?”

McKee said that she planned to appeal the ruling.

According to the Ohio Attorney General’s Office, eight juveniles in the state who have received the punishment of lifetime sex offender registration.

---

MO - Springfield Sex Offender Reacts to News he Could Eventually be Removed from Registry

Original Article

See the video at the link above.

03/28/2012

By Joanna Small and Joel Girdner

A Missouri representative wants to pass a law that would allow some offenders to petition for removal from the lifetime sex offender registry.

SPRINGFIELD - A sex offender tells us it would give him his life back; a victim's advocate says it would put people at risk. Those are two very different responses Wednesday to a bill on the verge of passing in the Missouri house that would change the state sex offender registry.

Right now if you're a Missouri sex offender your name is on the registry for life. A representative from Versailles wants to make some exceptions to that steadfast policy.

[name withheld] is watching himself grow up, flipping through a photo album of sorts, but there's nothing nostalgic about the photos on his television screen; they're courtesy of the Department of Corrections and the Greene County Sheriff's Office. That's because [name withheld] essentially grew up in prison.

"I celled up with a convict; he was killer. I know who he is, I know everything about him," [name withheld] tells us. "I had my mom look him up because I didn't know who I was celling with, didn't know who he was. He was a killer, in there for 30 years, and I'm just a kid. I was like 19 at the time," he remembers.

At 17, his senior year of high school, [name withheld] was charged with statutory rape for an offense he swears he didn't commit. A probation violation sent him to prison for two years. Now he's out, and life's about as bad as it was when he was in.

"I'm labeled as a sex offender, everybody is going to look at me differently. I hate it, I really do," says [name withheld]. "Every time someone calls me a child molester I get irked."

Right now that label is inescapable.[name withheld] 's on the sex offender registry, but a new Missouri law could take him off.

"It would be great, it would help me out a lot. I don't even have kids yet. What happens when I have kids? I can't go to parks with them, can't go anywhere there's any other kids at, can't take them to Chuck E. Cheese."

House Bill 1700 (PDF) establishes a three tier system, axing the lowest risk sex offenders from the list entirely. People, like [name withheld], whose offenses are considered mid-level on the tier system will have the opportunity, ten years after their sentence has ended, to petition a judge for removal. Those with the most serious offenses-- forcible rape and child molestation-- could petition after 20 years.

"I think it could put individuals at risk, I do," counters Nancy Berlin with The Victim's Center in Springfield.

Victim's advocates like Berlin aren't as excited about the proposal as [name withheld] is.

"We have so many adult survivors who were victims of a sexual crime as children, and that is something they have for the rest of their lives," explains Berlin. "It's not erased or taken off of anything, it's part of who they are."

She says it should be the same for perpetrators and that's what the registry ensures.
- And here is another person admitting the registry is basically a punishment!

"It is a life sentence, definitely," agrees [name withheld].

But he doesn't think it should be; he says he'd just like the chance to start a new album.

"It kills me. I want to have a family," he tells us, looking again at the pictures.

The representative who is sponsoring the bill says the tier system would address a job crisis among Missouri's sex offenders. He says more than half on the registry report they're unemployed.

A handful of other states, including Maine, South Dakota, Texas, and California have considered or are currently considering similar systems. Massachusetts already has one in place.

---

IN - Convicted sex offender challenges lifetime Facebook ban

Original Article

Hopefully this case will turn out like the recent one in Louisiana?

02/20/2012

By Russ McQuaid

Federal lawsuit seeks access to social media for sex offenders

Indianapolis - An Indianapolis sex offender has filed a federal lawsuit challenging his lifetime ban from social media sites like Facebook.

The offender, named anonymously as John Doe, was convicted of two counts of child exploitation in 2002. He was incarcerated through 2003 and released in 2004.

The suit claims John Doe is suffering socially and professionally because of the ban.

"He is a businessperson and as a businessperson he would like to participate in the business networks that allow you to get your name out and network with other people," said Ken Faulk, American Civil Liberties Union. "Is that person going to be bared from communicating in the 21st Century? That seems to be a significant price to pay to violate the First Amendment."

Marion County Sheriff John Layton is charged with maintaining the sex offender registry.

"This is an extension of an incarceration. If the judge has ruled that this is a lifetime report, that this person is on here for life, this is an extension of that jail time itself in one way or another taking freedoms away from people who decided to violate and go against society," said Layton.

On Tuesday, a federal magistrate will hear a motion for John Doe to keep his identity secret while fighting the First Amendment access case. The suit also seeks class action status to represent more than 1,100 registered sex offenders in Marion County.

Video Link

---

AR - Registered sex offenders - A sex offender speaks out

Original Article

02/19/2012

By Chad Miller

Offenders required to carry label even after serving sentence

Editor's note: The sex offender mentioned in this story agreed to speak to the Daily Press on the condition of anonymity. His name has been changed in the story to preserve his anonymity.

Meet Tom. Tom is a successful local business owner. He said he decided to go into business for himself because he had difficulty getting hired to work in several career fields because of one fact he was required to disclose to potential employers. Tom is a registered sex offender. He said he had been on the Arkansas Crime Information Center (ACIC) website as a sex offender for more than 10 years.

Tom said at the time he committed his offense, he was on "a large scholarship" to college and had dreams of furthering his education. However, he said that all changed when had "consensual sex" with a teenage girl.

"I had goals and dreams," Tom said. "But now I can't do anything. I would've liked to have gone to law school, but I can't do that. I actually considered becoming a realtor. But I can't get a real estate license. There's so many things you can't do [as a registered sex offender] to better your life."

Tom did not deny what he did was "wrong." He said he was in his early 20s at the time of his offense.

"For lack of better terms... I was a stupid, horny kid," Tom said. "When I was arrested, I told the police exactly what happened. I never denied anything. I'm not looking for sympathy saying I did no wrong. What I am looking for is somebody to step back and say 'Wait a minute. We've taken somebody's entire life away from them.'"

After the assessment process sex offenders are required to go through to determine their risk level, Tom was classified as a Level 2 (moderate risk) offender. He said the stigma associated with his classification was difficult to live with.

"I had people driving slowly by my house and looking at it [when I first moved to Paragould]," Tom said. "They would drive by my house and yell 'child molester,' or 'baby raper.' I don't have restrictions on where I can live. I'm allowed to go the park and do those things that Level 3 and 4 [sex offenders] are not."

He said he had to remain on the sex offender registry for a minimum of 15 years before he could possibly have his name removed. He said he felt the assessment process might need to be re-examined.

"People see the list [of registered sex offenders] and they don't break it down into levels or what happened," Tom said. "All they [think] is 'This guy is on the list. He's a child molester.' But there are people on the list who were canoeing down the river and they [urinate] off the canoe and somebody sees them. Well, now they're on the list because they exposed themselves to an underage person. It's ridiculous that something like that has now become an instant minimum 15-year sentence."

Tom said he served less than a year in prison for his crime. He said he had no criminal record before his crime or since. However, he said he felt being on the list was another punishment.

"They say that being on the list isn't a punishment," Tom said. "I'm sorry... being on the list is much worse than my punishment was. It [my crime] was a Class D felony, which is the lowest level felony you can get, and here I sit for 15 years."

Tom said normally Level 2 offenders were not listed on the ACIC website. However, he said the reason he was on the website was because the crime occurred in the victim's home, which made it an "aggravated" offense.

"People get an idea in their head of what a sex offender is — which is this greasy-haired [man] in a van with a bag of candy and a teddy bear," Tom said. "So, they push and push for stronger laws."

Paragould Police Capt. Greg Trout said state law required sex offenders to notify local law enforcement whenever they moved from one jurisdiction to another and even when they moved within that agency's jurisdiction. He said some sex offenders not only had to register their residence, but also where they worked or any other place they might "spend a significant amount of time."

"If they change their address, they must notify [local law enforcement] 10 days in advance," Trout said. "Some [offenders] are restricted from living in certain areas. Level 3 and Level 4 offenders are restricted from living within 2,000 feet of a daycare, park, school and things like that. Sometimes, we have to physically look at the house they live in and figure out if it's within 2,000 feet of one of those locations."

Second Judicial District deputy prosecutor Kimberly Dale said she felt some laws concerning sex offender registration needed to be changed. She said there was a difference between a young man dating a teenage girl and a sexual predator who looked for victims.

"One thing I always want to be careful of any time I have someone who's pleading to a sex-related crime, and may have to register as a sex offender, is I want to make sure that is someone I really believe the public needs to be aware of," Dale said. "The last thing I want is for someone to be a registered sex offender and them not really be a harm to society or somebody that society doesn't need to waste their time being concerned about."

"Let's say you've got 100 people who, by virtue of the law, have to be a registered sex offender," Dale added. "Well, if we sat down and looked at the initial offense they plead to, we might determine that really only 30 of them were people society needed to be aware of. I know legislators are always really quick to pass a new bill that has to do with a sex offender, but it might [affect] someone the public would not be concerned about. I think [the law] is not harsh enough to those that need it and sometimes, I think it's too harsh on those that we shouldn't be concerned about."

---