CT- Not On My Beach

6-18-2008 Connecticut:

Why banning sex offenders from West Haven's public places won't keep kids safe.

When Charles got out of prison last month after serving two years for possession of child pornography, he went to pick up some things from the house of his ex-wife, who had divorced him while he was incarcerated. A neighbor mowing the lawn saw Charles—who says he was well within the terms of his probation—and immediately called the police. (Charles asked that his last name not be used for this story.)

No one wants a sex offender living, or even walking, down their street. Problem is, they have to live somewhere. Charles is one of 57 registered sex offenders living in West Haven, all of whom the City Council is trying to ban from its beaches, parks, sports facilities and swimming pools in order, they say, to protect the children.

A proposed ordinance would allow police officers to issue a warning and then a $100 fine to any sex offenders caught in these "child safety zones." Although well-intentioned (hell, it's not even an election year in West Haven), the idea comes riddled with questions about constitutionality, enforceability and its real effect on the safety of children.

The City Council wants the final ordinance to be immune to legal challenges. Corporation Counsel Peter Barrett, who is reviewing the law, admits it will be difficult, if not impossible, to make it legally sound. "It's very broad," he says.

Critics say it's too broad, not distinguishing between those who offended against children and those against adults, or those who assaulted strangers and those who assaulted people they knew. In West Haven, 21 out of the 57 offenders were convicted for a crime against children, or 37 percent. Two of the 57 were convicted in other states, and details of their crimes are not on the registry.

"We need to protect children from the true child predators," says council member Gail Carroll. She'll be happy to support the law—written by her colleague Stephen DeCrescenzo and Police Chief Ronald Quagliani—once it's narrowed down, she says.

In Connecticut, you can get on the state sex offender registry for rape and other forms of sexual assault, as well as for statutory rape (the age of consent here is 16), child porn, kidnapping, enticing a minor over the computer and voyeurism.

Barrett says the breadth of the proposed ordinance is one of the issues he's examining. But if he addresses all the legal issues involved, he says, "I'm not convinced it's going to resemble the (proposed) ordinance enough for the council."

Andrew Schneider, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut, says the "whole purpose behind" the law is the problem.

"No matter how fine they tune this law, it's still a misguided piece of legislation," he says. "Our justice system is based on the principle that (once) you've paid your debt to society, you should be able to live as a free man." He adds that the ACLU CT opposes such laws and will be keeping an eye on West Haven's.

Similar bans passed recently in Danbury and Bristol have not been challenged in court, but they have also not yielded much in the way of offenders.

So far, there have been no incidents under the law in Bristol, says Police Lt. Edward Spyros. Bristol has 85 registered sex offenders.

In Danbury, where 43 registered offenders live, a Common Council committee recently voted to increase the fine from $100 to $250, despite the fact that no tickets have been issued. But, says Detective Lt. Tom Michael, one written warning has been given. In that case, the sex offender was an employee of a camping-equipment store that gave a demonstration in one of the city's parks. A local newspaper wrote a story about the event, quoting the sex offender; an officer from the youth bureau recognized his name, went to his home and issued him the warning.

Both of these towns rely on chance to enforce these laws, hoping a police officer on patrol or a citizen would recognize a sex offender in one of these "no-fly" zones. West Haven would do the same, but might have more luck: One detective in the special victims unit, Brian Reilly, is familiar with every offender in town. He checks up on them, going to their listed addresses to make sure they live there. If he suspects they don't, he'll even ask to see their dirty laundry for proof. Under state law, local cops aren't required to do that unless an offender doesn't respond to a letter sent from the registry office.

But even if these ordinances were proven legal and the police could enforce them effectively, would they actually do anything to protect the children?

David D'Amora, the head of the Center for the Treatment of Problem Sexual Behavior, thinks such laws could have the opposite effect. By taking away offenders' wholesome activities (say, swimming at the beach or playing softball in the park), cities might be sending them toward relapse.

"When we keep removing normal opportunities from people, the risk increases," D'Amora says. "We know that employment, housing and engaging in appropriate social activities—not the wrong thing—are three of the most powerful items that impact people making it."

There's been a national trend of putting more and more restrictions on where sex offenders can be, he says, but these laws are rarely based on concrete data. For one, very few sex offenders attack strangers in public places, and those that do, D'Amora says, are often first-timers. He's all for putting restrictions on the most dangerous offenders, but not the entire spectrum of pervs.

"We're making a lot of policy nationally without looking at data to support it. If we're really concerned about community safety, we shouldn't be making slapdash decisions," he says, adding that the best thing a community can do is provide close and constant supervision. He cites an Iowa law that heavily restricted where sex offenders could live; after it passed, the portion of unregistered offenders shot up from 14 to 50 percent.

Nancy Kushins is the executive director of Connecticut Sexual Assault Crisis Services, which operates rape crisis centers throughout the state. She agrees with D'Amora and worries that such laws "could be perpetuating the stranger-danger myth. It's well known that children are more often than not sexually assaulted by someone they know," with more than 90 percent of child victims in Connecticut knowing their attacker.

Since the reporting rate for sexual crimes is, nationally, between 16 and 40 percent, most sex offenders aren't on the registry at all, says Kushins.

For now, the West Haven law is being revised and may even be held, as the council ponders waiting for the state legislature to tighten up sex offender laws. The General Assembly must comply with a new federal law, much stricter on offenders, by 2009.

Charles, the sex offender from West Haven, would like to see the West Haven ordinance trashed. "Occasionally, I might have gone for a walk before (prison), on the (beachside) bike path," he said. "I'd still like to go for a walk." ..News Source.. by Rachel Slajda