CA - Sex-offender laws are ineffective and unfair, critics say

Original Article

10/17/2014

By Puck Lo

Frank Lindsay, 62, is a father, small-business owner and avid surfer. He’s also one of 105,000 people in California — and 760,000 nationally — listed as a sex offender. In accordance with federal law, his name, photograph and home address appear in a public, online offender registry. In 1979, Lindsay, then 27, was convicted of lewd and lascivious acts with a minor under the age of 14.

“I thought I could do whatever I wanted,” Lindsay says. “Add on some alcohol, and I was a real asshole.”

Today, Lindsay considers himself a reformed man. He says he hasn’t had a drink in 30 years, is a Taoist and advocate for restorative justice — encouraging violent people to make amends for their actions. But, he says, “It seems that I can never be forgiven.”

Few groups are as widely despised as sex offenders. Activities prosecuted as sex offenses vary by state, but can include public urination, consensual sex between teenagers, streaking, prostitution, downloading child pornography and rape. In some states, law-enforcement officials distribute flyers to notify neighbors of registrants’ convictions. Some registrants are prohibited from using the Internet. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that indefinite detention at psychiatric hospitals — or “civil commitment” — of sex offenders is constitutional.

The first law requiring sex offenders to register publicly and for life was passed in California in 1947 and targeted gay men, according to Andrew Extein, executive director of the Center for Sexual Justice. But many of today’s laws have their origins in the late 1970s, when feminists and social conservatives worked together to publicize high-profile “stranger danger” attacks on children, says Roger Lancaster, anthropology professor at George Mason University and author of “Sex Panic and the Punitive State.”

Beginning in the mid-1990s, several laws went into effect that changed how sex-offense cases were prosecuted. In 1994, states were required to create databases of sex offenders. Two years later, Megan’s Law, named for a 7-year-old in New Jersey who was brutally raped and murdered by a neighbor with two previous sex convictions, allowed states to make those registries public. States passed their own versions of the law; in some cases, they required that neighbors be notified of paroled offenders’ previous convictions. Later laws moved those sex-offender databases online, created a national registry, required lifetime registration of people 14 years old and up and imposed harsh mandatory minimum sentences for crimes involving children.

But almost 20 years after the passage of Megan’s Law, criminologists and judges, along with a burgeoning movement of sex-offender registrants and their families, are challenging not only the constitutionality of the laws but their effectiveness in reducing sexual assault. In January, a California court ruled in favor of a paroled sex offender who had argued that city and county “child-safety zone” ordinances prohibiting people in the registry from using parks, beaches and similar recreation areas were an unconstitutional form of banishment. In April, the state Supreme Court upheld the ruling by declining to review it.

See Also: California Reform Sex Offender Laws

Read the entire article

NJ - Twenty years later, has Megan’s Law delivered?

Maureen Kanka

Original Article

08/24/2014

It’s been 20 years since New Jersey’s Legislature passed Megan’s Law. The two decades since have been filled with legal challenges and disappointment it didn’t accomplish what many thought it would. It’s what happens when politics and emotion team to shortcut the legislative process.

The law is named for Megan Kanka, who was raped and killed in 1994 when she was 7 after being lured into the home of a twice-convicted sex offender, Jesse Timmendequas, who lived across the street from the child.

Her parents, Maureen and Richard, lobbied the Legislature for a law to require registration of sex offenders; it was named after their daughter. It went into effect just months after her horrible death.

Typical of legislation rushed through, New Jersey’s version has been much challenged. Other states and the federal government took their time and did it better. In New Jersey, there is a back story involving Republican Garabed “Chuck” Haytaian, who was Assembly speaker and wanted to replace Frank Lautenberg in the U.S. Senate. His colleagues saw the law as an opportunity.

In his campaign ads, Haytaian bragged he “fast-tracked Megan’s Law.” Both chambers of the Legislature were controlled by Republicans, and so was the Governor’s Office. They wanted to see Lautenberg, a Democrat, beaten. Haytaian came within 3 points of winning.

Emotion and political ambition are not a good combination for strong, effective legislation — the usual vetting and debate got lost. After its passage, it was tied up in court for years, a lot of it because of unforeseen problems. As much as we hate it, there is a reason the legislative process is slow and deliberate by design.

In 2009, a study by the state Department of Corrections and Rutgers University concluded Megan’s Law doesn’t deter sex offenders in New Jersey. The report says it makes it easier to find them because of registration, but you don’t need a report to tell us that. It also said the cost of carrying out the law — the report used $5.1 million, the cost in 2007 — may not be justified.

Rest of the article

DC - International Megan's Law passed by U.S. House of Representatives

Congressman Chris Smith

Original Article

05/20/2014

By Brendan McGrath

A local congressman is pushing a bill that would bring Megan’s Law, which has led to the creation of registries for child sex offenders across the country, onto the world stage.
- Not everybody on the online sex offender registries (hit-lists) are child sex offenders!

The International Megan’s Law, sponsored by Congressman Chris Smith (R-4th Dist.), was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives today.

The bill is named after Megan Kanka, a 7-year-old from Hamilton who was killed by a repeat sex offender living nearby her house 20 years ago.

“Sex offenders around the world are now able to cross borders and oceans easily to carry out their horrible designs against children under the cloak of anonymity and then disappear before a child is able or willing to reveal the crime,” Smith said today.

Smith has introduced versions of this bill multiple times over the past few years, including in 2010 when it passed the House, but it has never made it through the Senate.

This bill, H.R. 4573, was introduced two weeks ago and was passed unanimously by the House Foreign Affairs Committee before being passed by the House today.

The legislation is not just intended to prevent U.S. offenders from hurting children overseas, Smith said, but also to establish a reciprocal relationship.

“The International Megan’s Law would establish the model needed for the U.S. to persuade other countries to take action to stop both child sex tourism within their borders and protect children in the United States and elsewhere,” Smith said today.

Megan Kanka’s parents, Richard and Maureen, called the proposed law a “step in the right direction.”

“We must not only show the world that we will not tolerate these perverted acts in the United States but internationally also,” the Kankas said in a statement.

If the bill is passed by the Senate and signed into law by President Barack Obama, it would provide a legal framework for the Angel Watch Center, which is currently a one-person operation in the federal Immigration and Citizenship Enforcement agency that notifies destination countries of intended travel by offenders with a serious registered sex offense against a child, Smith’s release said.

“The stories of the victims are tragic — ruined childhoods, devastated families, lifetimes of memories of assaults and sometimes worse,” Smith said.

The bill also would work to establish better lines of communication to effectively share information about the travel of child sex offenders between federal agencies, the release said.

The Government Accountability Office issued a report in 2010 that said that in fiscal year 2008 at least 4,500 passports were issued to registered sex offenders by the U.S., the release said.

International Megan's Law moves through Congress

Richard and Maureen Kanka

Original Article

05/11/2014

By Cristina Rojas

The International Megan’s Law cleared a major hurdle Friday when the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee unanimously passed it.

Rep. Chris Smith (R-4th Dist.) has worked to pass the bill, which would expand the system of registering and tracking sex offenders to the international community, since 2008, when he first introduced the legislation. It was previously approved by the House in 2010.

It bears the name of Megan Kanka, a 7-year-old from Hamilton who, in 1994, was kidnapped, raped and killed by a repeat sex offender living nearby.

Under the bill, the United States would notify countries where registered sex offenders were seeking to travel. Those countries, in turn, would be asked to inform the U.S. when sex offenders travel to the U.S.

“The goals of this legislation do not stop at protecting children overseas from U.S. predators,” Smith said in a statement. “Sex offenders around the world are now able to cross borders and oceans to carry out their nefarious activity under the cloak of anonymity and disappear before a child is able or willing to reveal the crime.”

“The International Megan’s Law would establish the model needed for the U.S. to persuade other countries to take action to stop child sex tourism originating within their borders and threatening children in the United States and elsewhere,” Smith continued. “The goal is reciprocal notice.”

Smith said the International Megan’s Law would work in conjunction with anti-human trafficking laws, which Smith wrote and steered through Congress in 2000.

The bill is expected to be brought before the full House in the near future.

CA - North State Psychotherapist wants changes to Megan's Law

Dawn Horwitz-Person

Original Article

04/25/2014

Dawn Horwitz-Person is a Sex Offender Treatment Specialist in Chico. She deals with some of the most violent and dangerous convicted sex offenders in the north state. She has also been featured on "Oprah," and "Anderson Cooper 360." Oprah Winfrey flew to Chico in 2010 to meet with Horwitz-Person and four of her patients, who openly discussed how and why they chose their victims.

Horwitz-Person is one of many California Phycho-therapists hoping for changes to the California Department of Justice's sex offender registry Megan's Law, because she says it is misleading. Says Horwitz-Person, "If 90 percent of the people are offended by someone they know and love and trust, how is knowing where somebody lives going to keep your child safe?" She describes what she calls three fundamental problems with Megan's Law. She says it gives people a false sense of security, because they look at the dots on the sex offender map, determine they don't live close to any offenders, and feel safe. She says, "Ok, nobody lives by me. This is safe, and they forget that most offenders offend because they're family. People they know and love and trust. They're people they allow into their homes." Horwitz-Person adds that the registry makes people think about the stranger in the van down the street, instead of focusing on those who are allowed in the home, and given access to their kids. She says, "If it's focused on keeping that stranger danger myth alive, how are we really protecting our kids if they're not getting accurate information? We need to have conversations with our children about 'OK touch' and 'Not Ok touch.' Ninety percent of the current sex crimes are committed by people who have never been arrested, before we know who they are law enforcement knows who they are." Horwitz-Person says many predators are able to plea bargain off the registry, even though they are at high risk to re-offend. She says, "Something that may start out as felony rape will be plea bargained to somebody accepting a felony sexual battery. Felony sexual battery doesn't have to register. That person could be a really dangerous person, and they're not on Megan's Law." She cites one former patient who lives in Chico with multiple sexual battery offenses, who was able to stay off the list. She says, "I'm talking somebody who has crossed all barriers, with children, adults, men, women, animals, you name it. And this person, nobody knows about, and he's not on the registry." She says the final problem with Megan's Law is that it lumps in all offenders together, without taking into consideration the type or date of offense, and the risk assessment. She says it's a waste of money and resources to monitor some offenders, while others who are considered high-risk are not monitored once they're off probation.

The California Sex Offender Management Board has asked Governor Jerry Brown to create a risk-tier system, so that the most dangerous offenders can be more closely monitored. To watch Horwitz-Person's appearance on Oprah, click here.

CA - When sex-offender laws promote more crimes

Original Article

04/15/2014

National City has become the latest California city to face a lawsuit from a registered San Luis Obispo County sex offender over its sex-offender regulations. Frank Lindsay, 61, of Grover Beach, contends such local ordinances are superseded by Jessica’s Law, the 2006 measure adopted by California voters.

Among the provisions of Jessica’s Law is a prohibition on registered sex offenders living within 2,000 feet of any school or park. It was named for Jessica Lunsford, a Florida girl who was raped and murdered by a previously convicted sex offender.

Many communities, including National City, have adopted even more restrictive laws of their own. With the assistance of attorney Janice Bellucci — who says society must accept that sex offenders still have civil liberties — Lindsay has been making headway in going after these laws. In January, a state appellate court struck down separate measures adopted by Irvine and Orange County that required sex offenders to gain formal government permission before entering city or county parks. “The state intended to fully occupy the field of regulating registered sex offenders,” the appeals court ruled.

But instead of fighting Lindsay’s lawsuit, National City and other local cities that face similar challenges need a moment of clarity: What do they hope to achieve with sex-offender regulations?

Is the goal making sex offenders’ lives as miserable as possible? Or is it to reduce the likelihood that they will commit new sex crimes?

If it is the former, then fighting for Megan’s Law and even stricter local ordinances makes sense. If the goal is the latter, then these laws make no sense at all.

Setting up residency restrictions that make it difficult and in some cases impossible for sex offenders to stay with their families and to find work “contradicts decades of criminological research identifying factors associated with successful offender reintegration” into society, according to University of Louisville professor Richard Tewksbury and other authorities on sex-offender rehabilitation.

The released sex offender with a job, stable housing and supportive people in his life is far less a threat to the community than a sex offender who is a jobless transient kept from his family.

We understand where National City Mayor Ron Morrison is coming from when he told a U-T reporter that he hoped his city’s ordinance stayed in place: “If you are a registered predatory sex offender on children, I am sorry, you don’t get all your rights.”

We suspect the vast majority of the public shares this sentiment, which is why Jessica’s Law passed in a landslide. We also understand why folks would bristle at Bellucci’s characterization of this issue as being about civil liberties.

But if the goal is to avoid more tragedies like Jessica Lunsford’s, Californians need to think clearly and get past the bluster and demagoguery sometimes seen on public-safety issues. If existing laws make sex crimes more likely, they should be changed.

Repeal MEGAN's Law (Petition)

Petition Source

NJ - Legislators Want Sexual Offenders’ Re-offense Risk Determined Prior to Prison Release

Original Article

03/20/2014

To address what they see as a flaw in the state’s current sexual offender laws, Sen. Christopher J. Connors, Assemblyman Brian E. Rumpf and Assemblywoman DiAnne C. Gove have reintroduced legislation to require county prosecutors to determine sexual offenders’ risk of re-offense – or tier – prior to their release from incarceration.

Prosecutors classify sex offenders in one of three tiers based on the degree of risk they pose to the public: low risk/tier 1, moderate risk/tier 2, or high risk/tier 3.

“Current law prevents sex offenders from being tiered until they have been released into the community because the offender’s residence status is a factor that is considered in determining risk of re-offense,” the three members of the 9th District delegation said in a joint statement. “To address this glaring defect in the current law, our legislation would remove the residency from the factors used in the determination process so that sexual offenders are tiered before they are released into the community.”

The introduction of this legislation, the lawmakers explained, followed conversations with local law enforcement personnel, including county prosecutors, “who warned about the inherent problems created by tiering convicted sex offenders after they have been released from incarceration. Given the transient nature of sexual offenders, it is not uncommon for these individuals to flee before ever being tiered.”

“As a consequence, in these situations law enforcement and the public do not have a complete picture as to the offender’s likelihood of re-offending. Tiering classifications determine the level of community notification, which includes such information as an offender’s name, description and photograph, address, place of employment or school if applicable, a description of the offender’s vehicle and license plate number, and a brief description of the offense.”

Throughout the past several legislative sessions, Connors, Rumpf and Gove have called for the state’s existing sexual offender statutes to be strengthened to better protect children and communities.

“While there are those that would argue that the residency factor allows for better determination of a sexual offender’s risk of re-offending, we strongly feel that it actually serves to the detriment of public safety and only complicates the responsibilities of law enforcement in tracking persons required to register under Megan’s Law,” they noted.

Upon reintroduction, the measures were referred to the Senate Law and Public Safety Committee and the Assembly Judiciary Committee. Both companion measures have bipartisan sponsorship.

NY - Two firms bid on Nassau sex offender monitoring contract

Original Article

Why are they even considering to allow biased "non-profit" organizations to monitor ex-offenders in the first place? This is a job for the police not someone else. Its well known that Laura Ahern of Parents for Megan's law has stooped to vigilante action before.

02/27/2014

By Robert Brodsky

Two Long Island nonprofit groups have bid on a proposed contract to intensify Nassau County’s monitoring of registered sex offenders.

Parents for Megan’s Law, a Stony Brook firm which conducts a similar monitoring program for Suffolk County, and Safe Center Long Island of Bethpage each placed bids on a request for proposals issued by the county before Wednesday’s deadline.

The Safe Center and its sister organizations have several existing contracts with Nassau to assist victims of domestic violence and child abuse.

Nassau spokesman Brian Nevin declined to identify the two bidders, although both firms have independently confirmed that they placed bids on the RFP.

Nassau wants to hire a private consultant to monitor its more than 550 registered sex offenders, including tracking their posts on social media and creating a smartphone app the public can use to report potential violations.

The vendor would also step up enforcement of requirements that convicted sex offenders accurately register their current address with the state.

While the cost of Nassau's proposed three-year contract is unclear, Suffolk -- which monitors more than 1,000 convicted sex offenders -- has a three-year, $2.7 million contract with Parents for Megan's Law.

The county is expected to select a winner in early March.

PA - Overloaded, underfunded

Original Article

02/25/2014

In 1994, _____ strangled, sexually assaulted and repeatedly slammed a Montgomery County woman's head into a wall. He served 30 months in jail for his violent crime and was classified as a high-risk sex offender. As such, _____ was required, once released from prison, to regularly report his whereabouts to the state's sex offender registry, a requirement of Megan's Law.

It's good to know that between 96 and 97 percent of Megan's Law offenders comply with its requirements, as reported in our Sunday story. The flip side is that about 3.5 percent don't. That means of the current 15,802 offenders who are entered in the registry, 556 have fallen off the radar screen. In other words, nobody knows where they are. At least nobody in law enforcement.

This list includes _____.

What's worrisome is that more than a year lapsed before state officials asked local police in Tinicum, where _____ last reported residing, to verify that the violent ex-offender still lived there.

This gap between disappearance and detection speaks to flaws in a system that nonetheless is pretty effective. A 97 percent success rate is an A-plus by most anybody's measurement. Still, the system will have failed — utterly and tragically — anybody who might become a victim of one of those fugitive 556.

If you take time to dissect our comprehensive report, one thing is clear: The system is overloaded and undermanned. Indeed, a recent federal study suggests the expansion of offenses requiring registration under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) has grown the list of offenders beyond current capacity to track all who require tracking.

We're not legal experts, but we question why people convicted of "interfering with custody of a child" or "invasion of privacy" or several other offenses falling under the Tier 1 category of the law would require tracking as sex offenders. It's why Montgomery County state Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, R-12, who introduced the Megan's Law legislation in the Senate, voted against the SORNA expansion.

"Part of the problem is continuing to add people to the list. As a result," Greenleaf said, "we have created a bureaucracy that is not sustainable, and we're not supplying enough money."

Bucks County state Sen. Tommy Tomlinson, R-6, who introduced Megan's Law legislation in the state House when he was a member there, is less sure about causality but is certain lawmakers need to figure out how to fix the flaws, whatever they are. And he said he plans to start by requesting a report from state police on how the registry is working and how to improve it.

"These people need to be monitored all the time," he said. No argument there. Doubtless, getting the system to function at a 100 percent success rate is a very tough challenge. Failing to do so, however, merely invites tragedy.
- A vast majority of those on the registry DO NOT need 24/7 monitoring as you suggest!

The Public Flaw in Megan's Law

Original Article

02/17/2014

By Rob McKenzie

What illegal behavior is part of your past? Speeding? Underage drinking? Leaving a store with an item you didn't pay for?

If you got caught, were you punished by a state-run website listing your offense and notifying others where you lived?

Probably not.

But what if those were your punishments? Would they have stopped your objectionable behavior in the future?

Probably not.

Because public humiliation generally doesn't work as a method of behavior modification.

And that's why Megan's Law, which requires authorities to notify communities of the whereabouts of sex offenders, is a bad idea.

In fact, a 2011 study in the Journal of Law and Economics by J.J. Prescott of the University of Michigan and Jonah E. Rockoff of Columbia University, finds that Megan's Law actually increases the possibility that sex offenders will offend again.

The researchers explain that when sex offenders are publicly identified, they're convinced they have no chance of getting back gainful employment, decent housing and normal social relations.

As a result, they spiral into depression, loneliness and ultimately that which is at the crux of their subsequent actions: desperation.

In general, when people are publicly humiliated, they tend to seek revenge by secretly (even more than before) continuing the offending behavior.

The argument here isn't that sexual offenders should be forgiven or excused from punishment. Sexual abuse is obviously a heinous behavior that irrevocably harms other human beings.

Rather, the argument is that with Megan's Law, the public ends up gloating over the eternal punishment of an offender and then "feeling" safer.

But even that assumption is upside down. Because if you search through one of the many publicly available databases of convicted sexual offenders and find an offender who lives near you, it only leads you to be wary of walking past their residence or even to avoid their side of the street completely.

That's not feeling safer.

Nor should you feel safer since Megan's Law makes it more likely for a sex offender to repeat an offense.

The line of thinking in this column won't be popular. But if we are going to let sex offenders out of prison — and maybe we shouldn't — we should give them a legitimate chance to normalize their lives.

What we learned all those years ago from reading "The Scarlet Letter" still stands:

Public humiliation is a shame.

PA - Carbondale sued over Megan's Law ordinance

Justin Taylor

Original Article

02/13/2014

By TERRIE MORGAN-BESECKER

A former Carbondale man forced from his home because his son is registered under Megan's Law is suing the city and the mayor, alleging he was targeted for enforcement because he challenged the constitutionality of a city ordinance that limited where sex offenders could live.

_____ of Archbald claims his son, _____, was among 15 Megan's Law offenders living in Carbondale in 2012, but he was the only one singled out by Mayor Justin Taylor (Facebook) for enforcement of the ordinance, which precluded registered sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a school, park or other areas where children might gather.

According to the lawsuit, _____ was convicted in 2009 of unlawful communication with a minor, which required him to register as a sex offender. _____ and _____ had lived in Carbondale without incident since 2010. In July 2012, Mr. Taylor contacted the _____' landlord and advised him that _____'s presence violated the city's ordinance and directed him to evict the men.
- So what is the Mayor doing the police' job for?

_____, who served as a magistrate judge in Wyoming County for 25 years before moving to the city, said he advised Mr. Taylor he believed a 2011 state Supreme Court decision in another case proved Carbondale's ordinance was unconstitutional. Mr. Taylor refused to acknowledge the case, saying "his" law took precedence, the suit states.

_____ continued to challenge the ordinance, meeting with Mr. Taylor roughly 12 times. The mayor refused to alter his stance, forcing the men to relocate in September 2012.

Upset he was forced out, _____ attended an Aug. 19 meeting of city council to urge council members to halt enforcement of the sex offender registration ordinance. After he spoke, Mr. Taylor "publicly and recklessly" stated _____ had an extensive criminal record, including burglary, forgery and receiving stolen property. The lawsuit states that information was false. Mr. Taylor later acknowledged the crimes he mentioned were committed by a different _____.
- That is defamation!

The lawsuit, filed by attorney Larry Moran of Scranton, claims Mr. Taylor and the city acted in a "capricious, unreasonable and discriminatory manner" in enforcing the ordinance, which was rescinded sometime after the _____ were forced to move. The lawsuit claims the actions against them were taken in retaliation for speaking out against the ordinance, which is a violation of their First Amendment right to free speech. The suit also seeks damages for violations of the _____' right to due process because they were given no opportunity to challenge the ordinance.

Efforts to reach Mr. Taylor were unsuccessful.

See Also:

• Former resident sues city, says son was targeted