NY: After 25 Years, It Is Past Time To Reform New York’s Sex Offender Risk Assessment System: Part II

[law.com – 2/9/21]

In Part 1 of this article, I outlined what I believe are the significant flaws in the Risk Assessment Instrument (the RAI) New York courts are required to use to assess sex offender risk under the Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA or Megan’s Law, Article 6-C of the Correction Law). Under SORA, courts are required to designate offenders as being at low, moderate or high risk to re-offend. The rankings not only determine the length and intrusiveness of sex offender registration and community notification, which often last for life, but vital collateral matters, like whether offenders may live within 1,000 feet of a school, receive Section 8 housing vouchers or live in public housing. The RAI is primarily designed to measure the risk that a sex offender will re-offend and the harm which would be caused by a re-offense.

Read the full article


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
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest article we will not approve your comment.
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

I sad before, I’ll say again. Considering well over 98% of new sex crime is committed by non-registrants, “risk” should be assessed as low to negligible absent proof to the contrary. I have a very hard time believing that the very few registrant recidivists didn’t show some kind of indication outside of the crime that led to registration in the first place that re-offense was likely.

Sounds like in NY, this “risk assessment instrument” DETERMINES your punishment after your sentence is satisfied lol.

Is there a way we can see it without having to register at law.com? Thanks!

yet these flawed RAI’s reemerge in california’s new law, though under a different name (“static”)