ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

National

Static-99 developers embrace redemption – Sex offender risk plummets over time in community, new study reports

And now — drum roll — the authors of the most widely used actuarial tool for assessing sex offender recidivism are conceding that even sex offenders cross a “redemption threshold” over time, such that their risk of committing a new sexual crime may become “indistinguishable from the risk presented by non-sexual offenders.”

Tracking a large group of 7,740 sexual offenders drawn from 21 different samples around the world, the researchers found that those who remain free in the community for five years or more after their release are at drastically reduced risk of committing a new sex offense. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. steve

    Wow. Great article. Now if only our state legislatures would read it.

    • Tired of hiding

      They are very selective in their reading list so they will never consider reading this.

      They only read what will assist them in their efforts to keep the public scared and paranoid (easier to control and manipulate that way) and keep the scary “sex offender” list growing and growing and growing.

      Political self-interest sickens me…95% of all politicians are parasitic bottom feeders who live off the public and actually DO NOTHING.

      Well, that’s not totally true..sometimes they hang out in men’s bathrooms at airports looking for di*k!

    • C

      Even if they do read it, it does not align with the programming of their constituency and, therefore, won’t help them garner any votes.
      Now, if the study in some way implied the benefits of gay marriage between illegal immigrants to participate in drone strikes to kill foreign and domestic “terrorists” they’d be all over it.

  2. mch

    Very good article which says what we’ve been saying for years. The article says risk drops if we’re allowed to remain free in the community for 5+ years, but we aren’t allowed to be free. The highest risk offenders drop a whopping 18% over time; but that’s not what we hear daily…can you imagine the low risk people, that become NO risk people, and not ever being a risk? I really like that they challenge “the notion of perpetual danger”. The only danger RSO’s may present is the truth…and that truth doesn’t get politician’s re-elected. Best of all, risk plummets with “fortunate life circumstances (jobs perhaps, housing?) life choices ( we’ve chosen not to reoffend), aging and deliberate interventions”.
    This is one of my new favorite articles!

  3. Tim

    Now if some bright researcher would study the recidivism rates of the population of people put on the registry retroactively. Before and after. It is as close as I can think of to suggesting what the affects of the registry are. Recidivism goes down, then maybe there is some positive affect. If rates stay the same, or goes up, maybe the registry itself is to blame. Any business needs to know if money it spends is achieving stated goals. If it keeps spreading on useless things, it is heading for bankruptcy. Only studies polititians accept as useful are campaign balance sheets.

  4. mch

    What a novel concept! You mean all that’s needed for success is a job, a home and freedom? I wonder why the brain trusts that write the imbicilic laws haven’t figured that out, or have they…

  5. Tim

    My guess is they have known for a long time. But what agency is passing up the chance at more funding, more chances for good publicity for nabbing those dangerous criminals handing out candy and annoying children? Easy. The general public needs to see this BS. It is their money being spent.
    The experts told me to maintain a job, get out of the house, go to a park and social gatherings now and then to keep from isolating myself. This is part of your anti-recidivism plan, they told me.
    Where are those experts now? Made impotent. Silenced. The governments are putting all sorts of barriers to achieving that plan. The unspoken truth: recidivism is good for them. Keeps the ball rolling, even if it has to be manufactured. I guess the experts (thankfully not all) are afraid to rock the boat, afraid to be excluded from the process all together, afraid to lose their share of the loot or be the target of the public’s anger. Guess what, experts, you are already excluded. In your place has been put the Hollywood sexologist, the drooling mobs with their pitchforks. These are your “experts.”

  6. Anonymous Nobody

    Note, even these people say low recidivism in merely FIVE years. But CA RSOL is fighting to make registration a minimum of 10 — for even the least of the least! And this report says that low recidivism is similar for all categories of sex offender is studied — so how can CDA RSOL be demanding 20 years SOR for Tier 2?!

    We cannot ever be arguing that the situation is worse than it is! And that is what this tier argument that CA RSOL has been presenting is doing. When you argue for 10 years for the least of the least you are implicitly saying that is reasonable, that is legitimate, that is not a problem. But that is not reasonable, that is not legitimate — as this report PROVES — that is VERY much a problem, and this argument today will be thrown back in our faces if we later ask to reduce it. And those who want to do all this crap to registrants will point to this argument to say that CA RSOL supports long times of registration and what else is happening to registrants as long as it simply is not lifetime.

    Mind you, these figures in this report are only for those who are released from prison — not those least of the least who were never even sentenced to prison, not for misdemeanants at all.

    Also note, they say the recidivism rate drops to 8.6% after five years. I have read at this site that California came out with a report a year ago showing the rate drops to something like, 2.5% over five years. And I have seen an FBI report from about a decade ago placing the number at 3%. These people have a much larger number. Perhaps thee difference in number is because they took their sample from people all over the world, not just in the US.

    • Tim

      I have to admit, I don’t know what the strategy is of favoring the tier system. I agree with Anonymous that it is not attacking the root of the problem: post sentence punishment with no good empirical support for any real public benefit. I don’t know if that is any legal argument. Probably not. Laws seem to get twisted around what the public wants anyway. Courts didn’t abolish slavery or give women the right to vote. Lawmakers were, after long struggle, convinced to sign a paper and it was done. You always get less than what you ask for so why not ask for more than you can ever hope to get?

  7. bruce

    Bruce Fein commented on an article
    We as Humans have only 2 emotions Love & fear. Love has no side effects except more love which is productive & healthy. Fear on the other hand has Tons of side effects like but not limited to Anger, Resentment, loss, Heart ache, Jealousy, etc.We as Humans also react in 1 or 2 maybe 3 ways. 1) We run away from it 2) We run into it which can be reckless. Or # 3 “I made up” We run Away until You are backed into a corner then run into it,;-) Any way You choose has a negative impact on those around You…..Except love……The More You Know, go Love Some One There’s already Enough side effects one would think have a nice day;-) Savvy?

  8. bruce

    We have been Programmed to fear So How do WE counter that? 180 degree turn & Drop sail & full star board “Load Cannons” & Brace Yer self Mate’s Were In for a ride & Ye May Not Be this way to hear Kinder Words From The likes of Me!!! Capt Hector Barbosa “POC Worlds End”! lol

  9. bruce

    I found this interview Very Interesting If You watch only the first 3 to 5 minutes of it You will Know Why,,What did He have to fear? Back Then?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjqccYmx13w#t=6

  10. bruce

    & Then I was given this to help with those interested with a COR.:
    Hi Bruce — I am sorry it took me so long to get back to you. Below is a link to California post-conviction Public Defender resources. This is just a first stab at trying to make a helpful referral. Let me know if this is helpful or not.

    http://www.ospd.ca.gov/info/allied.asp

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.