CT: Lawmakers Debate Changes in Sex Offender Registry

[courant.com – 4/1/19]


State legislators are debating whether they should make changes in the state’s sex offender registry, which was established in 1998.
Former Republican state legislator Bob Farr of West Hartford and other advocates called Monday for approving the recommendations of the state’s sentencing commission on changes to the registry, which is currently “based on the offense and not on the risk of re-offending.”

The current registry now lists convicted criminals for 10 years, 20 years or life. The registry started with 800 criminals who were placed retroactively onto the list when the registry was created two decades ago. Since then, the registry has grown to include people in virtually every town in the state with more than 6,000 names on the list.
“The public registry would only list high-risk offenders,” Farr said of the proposed changes. “The current registry lists too many names to be functional. … The city of Hartford has over 700 offenders.”

Some lawmakers say the list has become too unwieldy and should be pared down to alert the public regarding the most serious criminals. Farr said that a low-risk elderly person who committed an offense 30 years ago could still be on the list.

Read more


Related posts

Notify of

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


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. 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.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. 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.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email 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.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

They better have the courage to implement what is based on evidence. And discontinue the rules based on lies, myths, bias, and defamatory declarations. It looks like we’ve headed into the right climate where they’re realizing it’s too expensive for them to declare lies at the expense of getting sued.

@ Junior,

If they had the courage to “implement what is based on evidence” they would be talking about abolishing the registry, not merely changing it. All changes or amendments to registries ever do is maintain the status quo. In 20+ years of it’s public access, it has yet to play a role in the investigation or arrest of one single crime other than registry or parole/probation violations. Even on the rare occasions where registrants commit another sex offense, he was either ID’d on the spot or his registry status wasn’t known until after arrest. Either way, the registry is completely worthless. Worse than worthless when you consider the constitutional problems and collateral damage to family members and friends.

Good on them for seeing the light and to be working for a positive change. Most people on the registry will never commit another crime, a fact backed up by empirical evidence.