The classification of sex offenders based on the risks they pose to the community following their release from prison is subject to racial bias, according to a study published in the Criminal Justice Policy Review. Full Article
Related posts
-
Sex Offenders’ Risk Assessment Process and Effects on Jurisdiction Transitioning
Source: scholarworks.waldenu.edu 8/23/23 Abstract The Adam Walsh Act created sex offender notification and registration requirements to... -
Will the Supreme Court gut SORNA or overturn the Gundy decision in the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo hearing?
Source: jdsupra.com One of the most significant areas of the law for businesses is administrative law.... -
LA: Louisiana woman challenges Sorna using ADA angle
Source: courthousenews.com 12/21/23 NEW ORLEANS — A federal court in Louisiana denied the state police’s request...
Given that racism is hard-baked into our socio-political system, any punitive measure is going to have a racial bias. POC men, especially, face the indignity of being stereotyped as inherently more aggressive and unstable than white men http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550614553642, while POC boys have their childhoods circumscribed and are “adultified” when facing charges https://www.thenation.com/article/price-transgression/
As an aside, this racial bias is also, therefore, more evidence that the registration system is punitive and not “administrative”.
The poor get a higher tier level. I was scored a NY level 1 but after a lot of time and money, my attorney was successful in arguing me to a level 1.
The danger of Minority Report-style ‘risk assessments’ such as the Static-99R cannot be overstated. Like Ohio’s risk assessment, California’s Static-99R/Saratso scheme is *also* ‘overly weighted towards prior criminal records.’ Assuming that this paper is accurate in claiming that risk assessments are racist: not only is the Static-99R potentially racist; but there is also the fact that the Static-99R is discriminatory against gays, as well as ‘non-contact’ offenders. Some experts and studies have claimed and shown that non-contact offenders have lower recidivsm rates, as well as greater amicability to counseling. If true, why has this discrepancy not been ironed out with the great ‘Doctor’ Karl Hanson? Too many things do not make sense here. Karl Hanson’s discrepancies are very fishy if you ask me. Almost as IF the Static-99 ‘tests’ were intended to cleverly exaggerate by design.
To elaborate more on the dangerous encroachment of risk assessment instruments on civil liberties, the ACLU — as well as other civil rights activists — recently turned *against* bail ‘reform’ because it finally realized the danger in relying on said risk assessment tools. If we put aside the corrupt special interests that support the Static-99R, how many years will it take for our movement to realize the impending dangers that lurk within the Static-99R/Saratso scams?
https://reason.com/blog/2018/08/20/aclu-turns-against-california-bail-refor