In the 1990s, in response to a number of horrific and highly publicized crimes against children, states and the federal government created stringent penalties for sex offenders, notably registries where offenders’ names and addresses are available to the public.
But now critics across the country are demanding review and revision of these policies, saying they are based on false assumptions, are a waste of money and do more harm than good. Full Article
This is an excellent piece of journalism. It lays out the facts and points to the many negative consequences the registry causes not just for the RC, but family and society as a whole. Hopefully this publication has some decent coverage and readership.
Some lines from it merit mention.
=====
“We have to stop ignoring the evidence,” said Cindy Prizio, executive director of Connecticut for One Standard of Justice.
—–
Exactly. Thank you, Ms. Prizio, for saying this. Now if only judges and legislators would heed your words.
=====
If convicted sex offenders aren’t committing the new sex crimes, who is? The answer: relatives, teachers, coaches, physicians, clergymen, dates, babysitters or other children — people known to the victim and, overwhelmingly, first-time offenders.
—–
Again, so nice to have the truth bared and retold.
=====
She said in instances where the assailant was a family member, victims will sometimes push to have the individual placed on the police registry to protect the family’s reputation or privacy.
—–
Nothing like hypocrisy from the victims (as a whole). Let’s get all those nasty people on a public registry…except mine, for reputation and privacy. Umm, what about other families’ reputations and privacy? How self-serving.
It doesn’t matter how many articles are written pointing out the horrible toll the registry takes on all involved. Laws are passed on emotion, not fact.
I accept that there will always be a registry here. I accept that the 5% that get caught in an offense will be the ones paying for the 95% that never get arrested. I accept that the few lead the many in creating an atmosphere that is basically inhospitable for even daily life.
I accept that I must leave this country to have any chance of happiness in my life.
The registry is giving everyone a false sense of security, and the registry endangers lives.
Who or what classifies a person’s “risk” level? The word “risk” shows up in this article 11 times; but I think it is much easier said than to quantify someone’s true risk.
Law enforcement, politicians, government funded doctors, and researchers endlessly praise a “risk” based registry. But again, who and/or what is classifying a person as “high” risk?
Reserving a registry for only “high” risk offenders makes for a good soundbite. But are these politicians using the flawed Static-99R to label someone as high risk? And IF a person is truly “high” risk, why exacerbate one’s risk factors by further destroying employment, housing, and relationship prospects? The registry is not proven to prevent crime. And when 95 percent of sex offenses are committed by first-time offenders, then what exactly has the registry proved to have prevented?
It’s almost as if the politicians want to create offenses so that they can write and pass more laws to make the public believe the B.S. that they are selling us.