VT- Sex Offender Registry Suit Reveals Drafting Error

See earlier report:

8-12-2009 Vermont:

Haste makes waste — or in the case of Vermont's Internet sex offender registry, the omission of some 200 people lawmakers wanted to add but mistakenly didn't.

A drafting error in the final hours of the state Legislature's 2009 session accidentally excluded sex criminals who moved to Vermont after being convicted elsewhere and who lawmakers thought they had provided for in beefing up the law governing the registry.

"There was an error made," said state Sen. Richard Sears, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee. "The staff didn't pick it up, or we legislators, nor did the Department of Public Safety attorneys or the Department of Corrections attorneys poring through the bill at the last minute.

"It was a regrettable error," said Sears, D-Bennington.

It came to light Wednesday in a hearing on a suit filed by two men who were convicted in other states but have since moved to Vermont.

The suit, filed by St. Johnsbury attorney David Sleigh on behalf of unidentified Caledonia County residents "John Doe" and "John Roe," was the first legal challenge to changes in state law enacted in the wake of the killing of 12-year-old Brooke Bennett.

Her uncle, Michael Jacques, a registered sex offender, has been charged in her killing.

Heeding a huge public outcry, the Legislature enhanced laws governing sex offenders by expanding the list of crimes for which offenders must register, enhancing penalties for sex crimes and adding to the list of crimes that require Internet postings.

But the wording of Act 58, as passed, accidentally excluded those with out-of-state convictions whose names, photographs and identifying information would have been among an estimated 1,500 to be added to the list beginning Oct. 1.

Those people will still be required to register with the state and their names will remain on the registry, but they won't be online.

As of Wednesday, there were 2,456 people on the registry, but only 443 of them were listed on the Internet site maintained by the Vermont Criminal Information Center.

Typically, those with the most serious offenses, two or more prior sex convictions or citations for failure to register are the ones who get listed on the Internet site.

"The key issue people need to understand is that these out-of-state offenders are still on the registry," said Max Schlueter, director of the Criminal Information Center. "Because they're not on the Internet doesn't mean the information isn't public. The public can call VCIC if they have a question about somebody."

Sleigh's clients were convicted in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, respectively, and have served their sentences and are no longer on probation.

In his suit, filed Monday in Washington County Superior Court, Sleigh said the men have stable homes, jobs and family relationships now but would suffer "stigma, opprobrium and ostracism" if their names were added to the Internet listing.

That's no longer a threat because of the courtroom revelation Monday, which turned a routine hearing on a request for preliminary injunction into a 10-minute session that rendered the suit pointless.

"If the section does not apply to my clients, all our caterwauling about its deficiencies is moot," Sleigh told Judge Helen Toor.

Sears said he and House Judiciary Chairman William Lippert plan to address the oversight when the Legislature convenes in January.

"The goal to have the out-of-staters involved was that we didn't want people looking for safe haven, or sex offenders moving to Vermont. There was anecdotal evidence that people were looking to Vermont because it had easier laws," he said. ..Source.. by JOHN CURRAN