Interesting New Article on Registration and Notification Laws

J.J. Prescott, of Michigan, and Jonah Rockoff, of Columbia Business, have posted a very interesting empirical study concerning the efficacy of sex offender registration and notification laws on SSRN.  Here is the abstract:

In recent decades, sex offenders have been the targets of some of the most far-reaching and novel crime legislation in the U.S. Two key innovations have been registration and notification laws which, respectively, require that convicted sex offenders provide valid contact information to law enforcement authorities, and that information on sex offenders be made public. Using detailed information on the timing and scope of changes in state law, we study how registration and notification affect the frequency of sex offenses and the incidence of offenses across victims, and check for any change in police response to reported crimes. We find evidence that registration reduces the frequency of sex offenses by providing law enforcement with information on local sex offenders. As we predict from a simple model of criminal behavior, this decrease in crime is concentrated among local victims (e.g., friends, acquaintances, neighbors), while there is little evidence of a decrease in crimes against strangers. We also find evidence that community notification deters crime, but in a way unanticipated by legislators. Our results correspond with a model in which community notification deters first-time sex offenses, but increases recidivism by registered offenders due to a change in the relative utility of legal and illegal behavior. This finding is consistent with work by criminologists suggesting that notification may increase recidivism by imposing social and financial costs on registered sex offenders and making non-criminal activity relatively less attractive. We regard this latter finding as potentially important, given that the purpose of community notification is to reduce recidivism.

As Dan Filler at Faculty Lounge notes, one of the most interesting findings is that the laws seem to work best as a deterrent for potential criminals rather than as a means of discouraging sex offender recidivism:

To the degree that individual offenders have control over their actions, notification functions as a deterring punishment (notwithstanding the fact that the Supreme Court has happily embraced the fiction that Megan's Law isn't punishment at all).  To the degree that the an individual's conduct really is beyond rational control, offenders will reoffend notwithstanding the existence of registration and notification laws.   (It remains possible that notification empowers potential victims - that is a separate and complicated issue.)

This provides a real dilemma for supporters of registration and notification laws.  Citing Prescott and Rockoff's study to show the value of these laws undermines the legal fiction that has been created that registration and notification are not a form of punishment. On the other hand, there is an equal dilemma for those attacking these laws: they may be able to buttress their legal attacks that registration and notification are punishment, but they may have to concede the laws serve an important law enforcement function.

Michael Connelly raises a notable objection at Sentencing Law & Policy to the article:

The authors use reported offenses as their base but deal poorly with the likelihood that the increased attention to these crimes will lead many victims not to report. Their section on this possibility is very cursory and ignores the simple measure of looking at reports by victim before and after institution of the laws. Their results on their face would be exactly what we would predict if the often feared failure to report "Dad," "Unc," or Coach or Reverend rose as a result of those individuals' likely subsequent vilification in the community. Interesting paper but more work is needed before accepting its results.

Connelly's objection has a fair amount of anecdotal support since many many victims and defendants have remarked that the plea bargaining process has been altered by the registration requirements that a guilty plea entails. I could imagine a similar dynamic could occur in the initial decision to report. I think the article is great overall although I'm still trying to digest all of the data.  I highly recommend checking it out for yourself.

Comments

[Ilah]

"This provides a real dilemma for supporters of registration and notification laws. ... On the other hand, there is an equal dilemma for those attacking these laws:"

I haven't re-read the study, but I thought the clear distinction was made between registration and notification. I believe the conclusions were registration--the reporting to law enforcement, for the purpose of law enforcement records only--deters crimes by both first-time offenders AND registered offenders. But notification--the sharing of registration information with the public--increased recidivism among registrants while still deterring first-time offenders.

There were researchers early on who predicted that outcome. And there are many who have spent the past few years advocating for a system designed to deter recidivism rather than foster it.

I wonder how residency restrictions--a product of notification that reduce compliance with registration--factor into the picture as well.

"I could imagine a similar dynamic could occur in the initial decision to report."

Stop It Now!, the org dedicated to prevention, reported that calls made to its hotline by children at risk of being abused, as well as adults at risk of abusing, dropped to almost nothing after Megan's Law was introduced. I don't think that's because the abuse suddenly stopped.

[Mark]

(notwithstanding the fact that the Supreme Court has happily embraced the fiction that Megan's Law isn't punishment at all)

You have to give the Supreme Court come credit for their decision. At first the registry wasn't punishment. It was 'alerting the public to potential dangers'.

Problem is people decided to revert back to 2nd grade behavior when it comes to the registry, kind of like 'cooties'. People are so paranoid now they think their children are going to be harmed by a sex offender looking at them. Then you have politicians that turned the registry from just info to a completely new monster with these residency, internet, and all the other restrictions they have added on to it.

By itself the registry is not a bad thing. But how you legally fight multiple laws at once in the courts? Its not one law by itself causing the issues, its all the laws combined.

[cameron]

I was convicted of rape 22 years ago when I was 20 and she was 19. I admitted having sex, but didn't rape anyone. This is the only conviction I have ever had and I must say, I wonder when the time served will fit the crime. I have been run out of my home in two states, and one business, and was sent to prison for not notifying the police for not having a change of address, when I was forced to move due to a violent relationship that ended abruptly for fear of my life or limb, the girl later killed her live in boyfriend 2.5 years later. I didn't have a place (an address to move to, I had everything I owned in my car) I was pulled over and arrested for simply not having a place to write down as an address.

When does the time meet the crime? I was never on any probation. I served my time. But the state which I have not committed any sex crime has placed my name, address, job info, place of residence, and type of car, but didn't specify exactly what kind of crime I was covicted of and that cost me too, I was thought of as a child rapist because of the way the law is written, there wasn't and still isn't any real seporation between sex crimes, I guess they don't qualify like certain types of murder, like say Charles Manson in comparison to someone accidently killing someone, who didn't take the time to reread what they wrote that day? Or do people just want something/someone to place all of the worlds problems and solutions on? What is this world coming to?
When do I qualify for equality of life?
It would seem that Legislature just wants to start a witch hunt and cause irrepitable damage and push people into crime and irrational behavior. This will only bring more crazies to everyone's neghborhood. Just think about it for a minute, what would you do if someone violated everything about you, say they came in and took everything and I mean everything that means anything to you, Family, job, health, and dreams that you might have, everything, even your peace and happiness of your everyday life. What would be keeping you from lashing out, what would keep you sane?

By the way, all of these laws where grandfathered in, when I was convicted, they didn't have registry and all of the notifications, and this is legal? Let's say you pay your taxes, the Government comes in and innacts a law that states that you pay taxes say when you where 5 years old, you don't hear of the law and one day the cops come to your door and arrest you for not knowing the law first off, then inform you that you owe the Government back taxes and gives you the rest of your life to pay or go to jail and notifies your job, neighbor's, family, and then puts it on the web page and keeps adding other restrictions for you, how would you really feel about the Government, just so you know, that and more is how I feel. You think about that.

[Biff]

Megan's Law isn't punishment? Try having police officers show up at your house randomly to take you into the street and take pictures of you and your car. Fliers posted on your street "warning" the public of your identity. Teachers at your children's schools lecturing on how all sexual offenders should be locked away. Having employers use your past against you to pay you less than your counterparts because they know it is harder for you to find a job. Oh sure it is not punishment. I am sure drug dealers who also have sold drugs to minors would not throw a fit if they were subjected to the same standards. Or people who have a felony history of drinking and driving. Let's not do away with the law, but make the playing field equal. Any person that commits a crime involving a child has their information posted to a website. Registers with law enforcement for life. Has random checks to ensure compliance. Can have fliers posted about them in their neighborhoods. If it is NOT punishment and we REALLY are concerned about the childen. Thenlets make the law apply to all crimes involving children.