AZ: Arizona’s Sex Offender Laws: Recommendations for Reform

[Tamara Rice Lave in arizonastatelawjournal.org – 1/13/21]

In this Article, I consider ways in which Arizona’s laws regarding sex offenders should be reformed. I begin by focusing on laws that are designed to deal with the danger posed by convicted sex offenders: registration requirements, residence restrictions, and civil commitment. I contend that the state has overstated the risk posed by convicted sex offenders and that the laws meant to control them may do more harm than good. Next, I turn to police sexual violence. I argue that the state needs to go further in criminalizing this abhorrent conduct in order to promote the rule of law and protect vulnerable persons.

Download a PDF of the paper from arizonastatelawjournal.org

 

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.  
 

12 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Get em Tamara.

Outstanding article and research. Finally breaking down the decades old false stereotypes and faulty information. This gives me hope, if only people in the justice department and the law makers will take note. She stated what we all know, that registries do more harm than good and no data supports their effectiveness. My offense was a very long time ago. I have recovered fairly well, but i live in constant fear that if I am identified I could lose the job I worked so hard to get, all because of the oppressive registry that could put old information in the wrong hands.

The article basically says exactly what anti-registry advocates have been saying for years. The data against the registry is nothing new, and legislators have been well aware of that for longer than any of them will admit.

The problem is the politics of it all. Any legislative action against the registry is essentially political suicide, no matter how small or ineffective. It’s the general public that needs this data, not the idiotic, failed barristers who write laws now. IMHO, our conundrum is how to get the general public to receive this data in this age of bleeding-leading, shock-over-fact, sensationalist, subjective media.

The courts really need to start considering empirical evidence instead of rubber-stamping things: “The law is the law and there’s no law against legislatures creating bad and stupid laws.”

It’s like the vast majority of cases seems to hinge on whether or not it’s legal to have these laws than any sort of evidence behind the laws to their validity to their goal.

Legislators need to be held accountable for passing laws on false evidence. Courts need to grow a pair and stop giving legislators a pass. Legislators aren’t Gods and if they were they would be false Gods. Enough of being Americans pile of manure.

Another well written study with appropriate conclusions that should be added to the growing list of similarly written studies and get more attention to the facts herein. Hope all org’s with the same mission as ACSOL have this file in their library. Just an open thought for all here – is there one doc that has included all of the ref’s which refute the bad data and info and if so, what is it and where?

I live in AZ and am no longer on paper. I do though, have to register for the rest of my life. I had been thinking of petitioning to be relieved of this requirement and now this paper enforces a possible argument. I am a Level 1 risk assessment, which means no web entry or community notification. But I still show up on background checks which has made getting a good job very difficult. Thankfully, my current company believes in second chances and I am able to make a decent living.
Most definitely AZ needs to make it possible for people to get off the registry after so many years. I was convicted 20 years ago and am still dealing with the fear of being assaulted or my family being harassed or losing my job.
Thank you Tamara for a great paper