Thursday, December 12, 2013

ME - Maine's sex offender registry under microscope

Morning paper and coffee
Original Article


By Paul Merrill

AUGUSTA - Maine's Sex Offender Risk Assessment Advisory Committee is meeting in Augusta on Wednesday afternoon one week after WMTW News 8 learned that state public safety officials lost track of a Berwick sex offender.

The Department of Public Safety is conducting a full review of the way it tracks registered sex offenders because of the case involving 23-year-old _____ of Berwick. _____, a convicted sex offender, was arrested last week after police said he tried to lure fourth- and fifth-grade girls with candy outside a Berwick elementary school.

Police said _____ failed to re-register with the state sex offender registry in August.

The State Bureau of Identification was supposed to send a letter to _____ and, if necessary, contact the Berwick Police Department.

Neither of those things happened.

Public safety officials blame a clerical error and admit they're not sure how many other sex offenders may have fallen through the cracks.

WMTW News 8 spoke with officials in Auburn about how their city tracks sex offenders.

Deputy Police Chief Jason Moen tells us the department began taking a more proactive approach about five years ago.

Each officer is assigned to keep tabs on two sex offenders living within Auburn.

Moen said the city's system serves as a check to protect the community from any possible failures at the state level.

He said Auburn's system works and points out that the level of registered sex offenders living in Auburn has dropped by about half since the department implemented the new procedures.

Moen suspects that many of the offenders moved out of the city because they didn't like the department's new policies.


Sex Offender Issues said...

It doesn't matter what they do, if a person doesn't want to register, new laws won't prevent that.

ericangevine said...

While I cannot condone the reality that this offender was apparently stalking new victims, the issue here is that the state dropped the ball and did not send this guy a letter, which he therefore did not take to his local PD. But he had not moved! He was still living at the address on file and was therefore not lost at all.