Opponents of sex offender registration lists argue that the lists are more punitive than they are helpful. These opponents are using the Philip Garrido case as the smoking gun to show how ineffective sexual registration laws and registries are.
After taking one look at the Garrido case, there is no doubt that the number of missteps are mind-blowing, just as the number of missed opportunities (to bring Jaycee home earlier) are heartbreaking. But as we look at this case in hindsight - as those of us who are concerned about protecting children will - we are as worried about the far-reaching ramifications of this case as we are that Jaycee and her kids will never experience a smooth transition into mainstream life, given what she's gone through for 18 years as a sex slave.
New York Times author Monica Davey puts the concerns in perspective in her article, "Case Shows Limits of Sex Offender Alert Programs." This article asks hard questions and challenges us to decide whether sex registrations are all they are cracked up to be. How sad is it that we are forced to even ask that question when legislators and politicians are just recognizing that Americans have a right to expect legal protection of our children and an assurance that the best possible laws to do so are on the books.
I am not writing this to say that sex registry lists are foolproof, or that they guarantee safety, or that they don't have negative effects on those on the lists. Instead, this article forces us to evaluate whether these registries are fundamentally good policy. I believe they are. If just one child is saved from a sexual assault, a kidnap or a murder because of registration, then we have protected that child. And since children, as non-voters, do not have the ability to protect their rights legally, we as adults need to explore every possible avenue to do it for them.
The problem with sex offender lists is not necessarily the lists themselves but how we are using the lists, updating them, deciphering what they mean, and insuring that the "worst of the worst" are not only listed on this list but are actually being monitored.
Arguing in support of sex offender registrations over the past week has become more challenging. How can anyone claim with credibility that these lists are critical to investigating sex crimes and keeping offenders off the streets when the very people who run the registries, input the data, investigate the cases, etc., are those who allowed Philip Garrido to walk the streets freely in Antioch, Calif.? These people actually allowed his tent city to exist with no questions asked. They simply "checked in" on parole visits without thoroughly monitoring him and this registered sex offender to subject Jaycee Dugard to 18 years of captivity.
But the answer here is not getting rid of the registries. The answer is revamping the registries, making them consistent from state to state to insure that the information on the lists is meaningful to everybody. It means monitoring the privileges of parole and probation, and educating people on how to use the lists and what they mean.
While sex offender registries may be riddled with imperfections there are still benefits from the information they hold. By being able to search on Google for sex offender registries, anyone can access the information about who lives near them without depending on law enforcement, Department of Corrections, or anybody else to do their jobs. It puts the power of information in the hands of the people so that adults can better educate themselves about their neighbors, their friends' neighbors, and the people who live near their children's schools.
Once you search the list, you can then discuss safety with your family and explore how to protect yourself and your loved ones. We sometimes forget that even the people we know, our neighbors, can be a danger to us if we don't have all the information.
If we keep the registries and use them correctly, we will all be a lot safer than if they didn't exist!
Follow Robin Sax on Twitter: www.twitter.com/robinsax
National Sex Offender Registry
California Sex Offenders Registry
Arizona Sex Offender Search, Sex Offender Information Website ...
As a former prosecutor, you know 95% of court cases result in plea 'bargains', sending thousands of innocent people to jail and/or the sadistic so-called therapy convicted SO's must go through. Prosecutors like you pile on bogus charges if a defendant dares to demand a jury trial, making it impossible for uninformed jurors to consider his/her innocence. Who wants to look soft on a sex offender? Hearsay evidence from 'victims', many of whom are lying, is admissible, while defendants can't produce evidence of their innocence. Pleas are also win/wins for both lawyers, so even paying yours thousands, they still win while you lose. And they couldn't care about you less. No, it ain't what it used to be. You don't have a chance.
I've seen first-hand how the 'justice' system works now in these cases. An attorney takes every dime you have, then coerces you into a plea, threatening you with life in prison - for a first offence. If you're lucky enough to get probation, they rip you from your family, leaving devastated children who are eventually forced to admit your guilt - knowing it's all a lie. You're forced to masturbate in front of a video camera as part of your therapy.
"But as we look at this case in hindsight - as those of us who are concerned about protecting children will -..." Do some homework, sister, and you'll find that we, who are opposed to the registry, are far more concerned about our children and grandchildren than you in law and the victims rights business will ever be.
And you inanely say, "If one child is saved..." Listen, honey, if you want to do some good in this world, take your blinders off and be prepared for the reality of untold thousands of families caught in this nightmare. Go to http://www.pacwar.org or RSOL or any one of the growing number of websites devoted to reforming your feel-good laws that have done more damage to the American family than any laws in our history.
They may lose it soon, and they can not do anything useful for living.
Their comments here sound not good at all.
What they are offering: continue with current laws? Sex offender registry is growing 10% a year. Now we have 700,000 registered sex offenders, next year 770,000, after just 2 years from now 840.000 and so on. I do not count family members.
How government could monitor so many people? How many sex offenders we will have in 10 years? If Adam Walsh act will be passed soon, the number of sex offenders will increase much more then 10% a year. All sex offenders registrations will be for life, and 80% sex offenders will be reevaluated as level 3.
Many people, mostly politicians with tax payers subsidized salaries are working tireless to do more and more damage for this country.
I am really not proud to be an american.
Too much for me.
Sorry.
Fima
http://estrinyefim.newsvine.com
Consider the precept that a law is good "if it saves one child." Would you support complete separation between all adult men and all children? Clearly, this would save nearly all children from sexual abuse--hundreds of thousands would be saved every year.
Further, of around 670,000 sex offenses committed in America annually, only a small fraction of these are committed by registered offenders. Any parent who uses the registry to make safety decisions for their child is utterly missing the target and leaving their children vulnerable.
Please, study the science.
The story to get out to potential sex offenders is that you are changing someones life forever in a very negative way.
Children do not need your sex, they need nurturing and attention by real parents.
Please do not damage our children.
Ok Robin I will bite. Where is this one child? I can give you endless links to cases where this registry has destroyed children's lives forever can you please post a link that even suggests this registry has prevented one single case of abuse? Almost 700,000 RSO's surely there must be a few?
Do any of the bloggers know that you have a vested interest in keeping things exactly the way they are? You left the prosecutors office to become a talking head on CNN and whatever other "Infotainment" outlet will have you what would you do if the controversy ended?
The Dugard case is a shining glowing example of how the SO registry has not and will not EVER WORK. Now all that being said I am all for tougher sentencing and civil commitment for those deemed by professionals to be unable to benefit from therapy but once someone completes their sentence that's it!!
This little experiment is over and more and more people are waking up to reality. Care to Join us?
I don't know if my neighbor is a potential offender, or maybe one who hasn't yet been caught, but I sure appreciate the ability to steer clear of those we DO know about.
Second, the failure in this case occurred at the parole offices. In Texas I have seen how parole supervision means just that--supervision. Parole officers visit sites. How could California parole officials miss the tents if they were VISITING THE SITE? This wouldn't happen in Texas. Perhaps that is why California has a 60% recidivism rate compared to the 36% recidivism rate in Texas.
Let's not turn this into a "sex offender" issue. This is more serious.
I'm a parent but I'm sick of the notion that our society must revlove around our children. We spoil our children and ourselves way too much and it will be the end of our liberty.
(actual argument ot follow)
It's time to fix the laws. We should have punishments that fit the crime and allow the felon to be released with his debt paid to society. That might mean increasing some punishments, but it would also mean letting people free once released from parole. No haunting record, no registries, no GPS. If we cannot trust the freed man without tracking his every move, we should not release him.
We cannot prevent every sex crime or every crime. Branding felos with scarlet letters for their past misdeeds only creates an environment of instability and shame where more crimes are likely to happen.
I guess we'd rather feel safe then be safe! -We get the justice we deserve then.
This is an old argument that makes a lot of assumptions such as unlimited resources, and that enacting the registry will protect more children than it will harm. Resources are not limitless and maybe there are better ways to direct them to prevent more than "just one" child. It can also be argued that the registry causes more harm to children than good. There are just shy of 700,000 registered sex offenders in the country. Many live with children. Children in the household of registered sex offenders suffer harm directly related to the registry: bullying, depression, anxiety, suicide.
"It puts the power of information in the hands of the people . . ."
The registry creates a problem of information without context. People do not know how to assess the actual risk. The registry creates the sense of danger for those people who live near a registered sex offender. The actual danger is unknown. The current tier system is usually based upon the crime of conviction and not the actual risk of sexual predatory behavior. Because this information is given without education, the registry becomes a kind of vigilante hit list. Registrants and their families are harassed. Property is destroyed. Houses are burned. Sometimes people are killed. This means the registry might actually create more crime than it prevents. There may be a place for the registry but not as it is currently constructed and not without