2-27-2008 Maine:
Legislators this session likely will be asked to amend the state's sex offender registry law to give some kind of break to people who were convicted and sentenced as far back as 1982 and no longer appear to be a threat.
Those people, who were sentenced between January of 1982 and June of 1992, are required to register based on an amendment to Maine's sex offender registry law passed in 2005 meaning their name, address, photo and place of work are now being posted for everyone to see on the web.
A series of court challenges and testimony by those who say they have been hounded out of their work and homes because of their appearance on the list, is causing the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee to have second thoughts about what it and the Legislature did three years ago.
Committee Chairman Sen. William Diamond, D-Cumberland, is looking for suggestions on how to modify the register to limit public exposure for those who appear to be one-time offenders. He wants a bill to be considered by the Legislature this session.
"Any reasonable person could look at the people on that list now and say, 'They shouldn't be there.' And there are those that should be there," Diamond said. "Other than going through one at a time," he asked fellow committee members for suggestions on how to differentiate between what he calls the "bad guys" and those unlikely to re-offend.
The 2005 change that expanded the sex offender registry was crafted, in large part, as a reaction to the release in 2004 of Joseph Tellier of Saco, who raped and left for dead a then 10-year-old girl in 1989. When he was released from prison, he did not have to register as a sex offender because Maine's law then only went back to those sentenced as of July of 1992.
Tellier died last August and a month later the state Supreme Court ruled a case brought by a man identified only as John Doe, who claims his rights are being violated because the law didn't exist when he committed his crime in the mid-1980s, has merit. That case is still pending and its outcome could determine whether Maine's current sex offender registry is constitutional.
Doe's claim that he was afraid of violence against him because his name appears on the statewide registry was bolstered by the Easter Sunday 2006 murders of two men on the state's registry. The killer, who later committed suicide, apparently tracked them down using information on the state's website.
An idea that is gaining acceptance on the committee is to create what House committee chairman, Rep. Stan Gerzofsky, D-Brunswick, has dubbed a "silent registry" where some people caught up in the so-called 1982 to 1992 look-back would be on a registry only easily available to law enforcement officials.
Rep. Anne Haskell, D-Portland, said she not only supports the silent registry, but wonders if the committee shouldn't go further.
"I might even be open to simple repeal of the 10-year look-back," she said.
Rep. Gary Plummer, R-Windham, said he's considered repeal himself, but worries about those, like Tellier, who clearly should be on a list.
"What would happen if we say repeal the look-back except for those people who have reoffended?" Plummer asked at a committee work session on the bill last week.
"I think it's a copout to say we're going to drop it all together," said Rep. Joseph Tibbetts, R-Columbia, a retired sheriff and member of the committee. "No way I could ever support repeal."
Diamond said complete repeal would never make it through the Legislature, and some people should remain on the public list.
"I don't think anybody on the committee wants to take off the bad guys," Diamond said. "The trick is how do you draw the line? How do you separate them and how do you do that legislatively?" Diamond asked.
There currently are 2,989 people registered on the state sex offender website. Of that group about 1,050 were added as a result of extending the look-back period to 1982. All of those captured by the look-back are supposed to register for life because of the seriousness of their crimes.
That designation, however, does not capture all details of their offenses or their likelihood to re-offend, committee members believe. Some people, for example, may have pled to an offense as part of a brokered deal, not realizing they would be tagged for life.
The "silent" registry being considered by the committee would put those deemed unlikely to reoffend on a list available only to police, unless a request for information was made by the public. Among the criteria being considered by the committee for placing people on the unpublished list are those who never had to serve jail time for their crime or those who have had no new offenses. The State Police estimate that 20 percent of those on the list as a result of the look-back period to 1982 have re-offended. ..more.. by Victoria Wallack
No comments:
Post a Comment