MN: States Struggle With What to Do With Sex Offenders After Prison

MOOSE LAKE, Minn. — Behind razor wire and locked metal doors, hundreds of men waited on a recent morning to be counted, part of the daily routine inside a remote facility here that was built based on a design for a prison.

But this is not a prison, and most of these men — rapists, child abusers and other sex offenders — have completed their sentences. They are being held here indefinitely under a policy known as civil commitment, having been deemed “sexually dangerous” or “sexual psychopathic personalities” by courts. The intent, the authorities say, is to provide treatment to the most dangerous sex offenders until it is safe for the public for them to go home. Full Article

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“Sex offenders have a strong incentive to refuse treatment for three reasons: (1) during treatment, participants must confess to additional crimes or admit guilt to sexual transgressions and these admissions may be used against the participant in future court proceedings; (2) failure to complete treatment weighs in favor of commitment; and (3) completion of treatment does not correlate with release from commitment.” (From California Law Review, volume 98, issue 6) http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1064&context=californialawreview
Kind of a summing up of a rather in depth and extensively foot-noted look at what is wrong with the US civil commitment process.

What makes these individuals so high risk?

How did they arrive at the point where they were high risk?

Who let them become high risk?

Why are there no programs to gently guide everyone (EVERYONE) into healthy relationships?

When will society say enough and shift the focus away from after the fact punishment, management, treatment, registration, commitment, probation, parole, supervised release, house arrest, and begin doing as much as humanly possible to insure the fewest number of people ever find themselves in legal trouble over something sexual?

I say fewest because expecting 100% prevention from an imperfect species is not realistic. 95-99% reduction in the commission of sex offenses or for that matter all criminal conduct globally is probably doable if humanity really cared.

What struggle? It would all be cleared up if they read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, then applied what they learned. Problem solved. Justice restored.

Newsflash: There is no right way to do the wrong thing!