CT: Committee Considers Sex Offender Registry Changes

Source: ctnewsjunkie.com 8/24/21

A subcommittee of the state Sentencing Commission is working to create a process to allow certain individuals to be removed from the public sex offender registry.

After at least two attempts to reshape the law regarding people who have committed sex offenses, the General Assembly’s Incarceration and Collateral Consequences of Criminal Conviction Subcommittee will hear a presentation Thursday on two narrow proposals to create a path for people to get off the registry.

The proposals are in their infancy and likely will be altered several times before they go before the entire commission, said Alex Tsarkov, executive director of the Sentencing Commission. “We’ve been trying to do this for a very long time. It’s a tough topic to work with.”

It’s a safety issue that is playing out as a political issue, said Amber Vlangas, executive director of the Restorative Action Alliance, which advocates for victims of sexual violence and those who have been subject to “state violence” through probation and parole policies after conviction.

“We believe this perpetuates the cycle of violence,” Vlangas said of sex offender registries.

The registries create shame, isolation, and an inability for people to meet their economic needs which in turn creates instability and a greater possibility of reoffending, Vlangas said.

“What is going to make people safe? Stability,” said Vlangas, who is a victim of military sexual assault and married to someone who is on Connecticut’s registry. “We are in full support of providing a path off of the registries.”

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
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

Sounds like the registry is getting to big to manage in Connecticut too. The proposals are still in their infancy and will be altered 3-4 times before they go before the entire commission, California did this same song and dance for years before passing SB384.
It’s a tough issue for politicians they don’t wanna ruin their political careers by coming off as easy on sex offenders.
Today I read an article called the murder of Megan kank and Jessica Lunsford iv always heard their names but iv never took the time to actually read the details of their cases, after reading about what happened to them it’s obvious were all suffering and being punished for what these 2 psychopaths did.
In my opinion only tier 3 offenders should be publicly posted on the registry for life and tier 1-2 offenders should only be publicly listed while on probation or parole and after 10-20 years be relieved of their duty to register

Good luck

While this is really encouraging, it’s a shame that even in the People’s Republic of Connecticut (where stores and restaurants can’t give you disposable bags or straws) this is, at best, a moderately possible change 2-3 years out. Connecticut already has far fewer registrants publicly listed, per capita, than most states. There is such little political willpower for minor changes even in “far left”states.

If someone has been living a law abiding life for years they shouldn’t be on a registry. For those that believe if it benefits me they need a good kick in the Pants.