A Prosecutor's View: Sex Offender Registries in Light of Garrido

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

Comments

[cajajo]

Part 1

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.

[cajajo]

What possible good does humiliating and embarrassing and then being put on a registry for the world to see do? Until you totally are brain-washed into what they want, you have no chance of going home. If you still have a job, all your money goes to this therapy, a hotel room, polygraph tests, and counseling for your damaged children. They suffer in every imaginable way.

"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.

[Fima Etrin]

Registry and sex offenders industry are a huge source of income for many people in US, like John Walsh
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

[VDogPC]

The insane registry laws did not prevent this pervert, Philip Garrido, from doing what he did! The registry laws, and especially the residency / work place restrictions, have done far more harm than good. Forget about all the cases of vigilantism; forget about the fact that while these laws are proposed to protect the children, they include children, and a huge percentage of those on the list committed crimes that had nothing to do with children; forget about the fact that study after study has proven these laws not only are ineffective, but have actually made matters worse; forget about the fact that upon release from custody, registered sex offenders have one of the lowest recidivism rates, not the highest. In fact those who receive counseling and treatment while in custody have outstanding records as opposed to those convicted of other violent crimes! The fact is the registry and the residency / work place restrictions should be limited only to those who are proven child molesters and pedophiles. This Law Enforcement can handle and monitor effectively. Do you seriously believe a committed pedophile cannot walk or drive 500, 1000, 2500, 5000 feet or more? Jaycee Lee Dugard was abducted miles away from where Philip Garrido lived!

[VDogPC]

I am sure we will see comments from hysterical, uninformed individual(s) who will suggest that all those on the registry should be locked up for life or worse, say there is no rehabilitation for these people. And for a few they are right, we need to focus on those! Once a person has done their time that should be it. That is the foundation of this great country and its legal system. Don’t like it, move to China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, or wherever individual rights are ignored. If a person is a pedophile, lock them up for a long time and provide treatment. Treatment not working, keep them locked up. Many families are being destroyed for political expediency. Many children of those on the registry are being abused and ostracized at school. Whole families are forced into isolation and restricted from the work place. If the registry is to truly protect the children, then let’s focus on the pedophiles and child molesters’. Get rid of the residency/work place restrictions, focus on the loitering laws. Let the rest on the registry re-assimilate into society after they have done their time, become solid, productive citizens; part of the solution not the problem. The facts, (and the Garrido case) as well as virtually all of the research, and study after study have proven what we are doing now, mostly for political expediency and to appease hysterical uninformed parents is not working and is in fact making matters worse!

[sunnybunny]

Knowing who your neighbors are (really, meeting them in person as well as knowing a little about their actual habits) Keeping track of what your kids do, what they're interested in and who they talk to on a daily basis, and teaching your kids how to handle themselves in different situations, WILL go way further towards keeping kids safe. A lot of people on this registry are not child molesters and certainly a lot of child molesters are not on the registry.

[sk8terade]

well i think the takeaway from this article is that it is a "prosecutors" point of view. Well obviously most prosecutors dont care about looking at the logical facts, they want punishment at any cost, without care of the unintended consequences.

[sunnybunny]

That is a serious problem in our country today.

[HemiCuda]

The next to last paragraph is probably the best statement of her article, but in the context that it is used, the most absurd. You, as a parent don't need information on a neighbor to do your job and see to your child's safety. Adam Walsh is always a perfect example of a parent not doing their job, expecting the elected public officials to "keep my child safe" while I go shopping seven aisles over. As to the people we know being a danger, it isn't the convicted sex offender living down the street that committs over 94% of the new sex offenses each year, it is Uncle Fred, Pastor John, Fireman Tom, Salesman Sam, people known to the victim and the victim's family, who are not on the registry, never been convicted of a crime. While we are crying 'wolf' about everyone on the list, that person also has children and spouses who are innoncent victims. These people are not offenders, yet in most instances, they are treated worse. As another poster stated, there is no evidence anywhere that supports the belief that the registry has saved one child, yet there is countless incidents where the registry has made a victim out of an innoncent family member. Education is what will save our children, not laws enacted without any consideration for effect-intent by officials seeking to ride the backs of sex offenders up the steps of state houses throughout this country, using our children as building blocks.

[TWWhittaker]

If you really care about the safety of children, I suggest you dig deeper into the facts of sex offender registries, and the issue of offenders in general. Propaganda like "if it saves one child..." are leading us astray, motivating one vengeful law after another, and causing us to completely dropping the ball on child safety.

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.

[Guitarsandmore]

Once a child has been molested they are often victims for life, unable to have a normal sex life even as an adult.

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.

[sk8terade]

people like john coeuy should have never been let out. On the other hand, do we think debrah lafave is a real threat to are children? What happened to jessica lunsford really sucks, but how mark lunsford can go around having laws changed is beyond me when there was actually child porn found on his computer. I guess the law gave him a pass on that one...but we need to get real here!

[Pitbull09]

Robin? Yet another misguided myth filled article where the only redeeming argument is the soundbite"if it saves one child"?

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?

[edgemo]

I'll bite. The last two times we have moved, my wife and I checked local registries before choosing a neighborhood. We were able to avoid clusters of registered offenders in both Georgia, and California. I consider my son then to be one of the children saved.

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.

[x684867]

First, what this man did was wrong. In Texas, were he even to get out after something like this, then we would have Civil Committment processes in place to supervise him proactively.

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.

[MiddlepathII]

"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation." Adolf Hitler

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.

[sk8terade]

i cant believe the author of this article would stoop to the level of "if it saves 1 child". That is the oldest trick in the book. She forgot to say "its better to err on the side of caution".

[sunnybunny]

So they are not effective, they create a false sense of security, and they are very harmful to those who have to register and their families (not all of whom have to be rapists or child molesters- they just have to be convicted of some sort of a sex crime.) Doesn't sound like a very good system to me.

[Majoro]

"If just one child is saved from a sexual assault . . ."

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

[Altoids]

If the ones killed are the ones who raped kids, I have no problem with that.

[sunnybunny]

That's not necessarily true. But it sure makes you feel more secure to think that doesn't it?