Connecticut, Iowa Newspapers Calling For Sex Offender Law Reform
One Connecticut newspaper is calling for the state's sex offender registry law to be fixed. A Public Defender has more. From The Hartford Courant:
First, many true sex offenders are avoiding the registry altogether by "charge bargaining" in our courts. Current law requires sex offender registration only for convictions under certain specific statutes, such as first-degree sexual assault. Skilled defense attorneys know this and will agree to have their clients plead guilty and even accept a prison sentence in exchange for a prosecutor's agreement to have them plead to charges that do not require registration....
Second, there is far too little information about registered sex offenders on the current registry. Many other states provide important details on offenders, including whether the victims were male or female, adult or child, known to the offender or strangers, and some details of the crime.....
Third, there should be an explanation of risk level for individual offenders in our registry. All sex offenders are subjected to extensive risk assessment by the state Department of Correction, the Office of Adult Probation and the Parole Board, and citizens have a right to know this.
Fourth, there are so many names on Connecticut's registry that the significance of the information has been diluted. More than 5,100 names appear on the registry today. When it began 10 years ago, citizens assumed that every person listed was a dangerous sex offender and probably a pedophile. In reality, that is not the case....
Finally, the length of time an individual offender remains on the registry should be decided case by case based on risk. Ten years is much too short of a time for high-risk offenders. A minimum period should be established, and 10 years seems to be appropriate. That period then could be extended based on the offender's risk.....
Meanwhile, the most significant Iowa newspaper is proposing that the state repeal its ill-conceived 2,000 foot law. From The Des Moines Register:
The Iowa Legislature will have the opportunity next session to
repair an ill-conceived and ineffective state law. Though the price of
scuttling this bad law will be adopting another bad one, it is a
trade-off lawmakers should exercise, though with extreme reluctance.
The
existing Iowa law makes it a crime for convicted sex offenders to live
within 2,000 feet of any facility where children congregate, including
schools and child-care centers. In many cases, this means men and women
convicted of sex crimes are limited to living under bridges, along
riverbanks or remote areas of the county. The law absurdly does not
prohibit offenders from hanging out at any of those facilities, however.
The legion of critics of this law has grown to include law-enforcement officials, county prosecutors and even crime-victim advocates, who say the law has numerous unintended consequences, including discouraging reports of sex offenses and driving offenders underground....
The next step will be to work on Congress to rewrite the federal registry rules. Some who commit sex crimes may be incurable predators, and they deserve special treatment. The law treats all sex offenders alike, however, and as a result no one is any safer, law-enforcement resources are wasted and lives are unnecessarily ruined.
Iowa has learned that lesson. Now, Congress should get the message.
It is wonderful to see Iowa considering repealing the 2000 ft. residency restrictions. I mean, if they can't listen to the Sheriffs Assn. and the Prosecutors Assn., who can they listen too? They could add in the hundreds of studies by other States, The Federal Government, Sex Offender Treatment Professionals and Researchers.
It is so uplifting to see more and more people "getting it" and repealing laws that cause more harm than good, and setting their minds and hearts to creating measures that actually ARE effective and protect our children.
It has been a long hard road Iowa but I congratulate you for your attention to experience.
Posted by: Magister | December 08, 2008 at 10:44 PM