December 31, 2009

Tougher law is sought on sex offenders

12-31-2009 New York:

Dec. 31--Efforts to eliminate "weak parts" in the state's civil confinement law that have allowed paroled sex offenders, including 100-year-old Theodore A. Sypnier, to remain free were unveiled Wednesday by state lawmakers.

A proposed amendment to the 2007 legislation would automatically require repeat sex offenders to receive a psychiatric examination before they are considered for release from prison, according to Assemblyman Sam Hoyt, D-Buffalo, who addressed a news conference in downtown Buffalo.

I find it interesting that, this lawmaker, wants a psych exam, when it is well known that sex offenders are not considered mentally ill! So, the purpose of a psych exam is just another hoop for offenders to jump through? Or, isn't it more likely that, since it is well known that no one will put their name on a psych exam, for fear that the offender will reoffend, that, such will stop the offender from being released?

In addition, the state's Office of Mental Health would no longer have exclusive authority on petitioning the state attorney general's office to pursue court action to confine an individual for as long as life, if the examiners believe it is necessary.

The revisions were prompted after Hoyt and fellow lawmakers read Buffalo News reports indicating Sypnier planned to establish relationships with several of his great-grandchildren he never met.

Other newspaper stories quoted Sypnier's grown daughter and a teenage girl describing how he sexually attacked them as children. They spoke on the condition that it might help in making a case to halt Sypnier's release.

Hoyt said the amendment, if approved in the upcoming legislative session that starts in about two weeks, would not be retroactive to include Sypnier.

Sypnier, who has three sex offense convictions involving children, was released Nov. 6 from prison after serving 15 months on a parole violation for failure to attend classes that provide counseling to sex offenders.

He told The News that he saw no need to attend the classes and wanted to hire a lawyer to fight the remainder of his parole, which concludes in May 2012.

"Civil Confinement was enacted to protect the public from sex offenders who are unable to control their behaviors," Hoyt said. "If Ted Sypnier does not qualify for civil confinement, then we have to re-examine this law and make some changes."

Citing statistics that indicate individuals with sex offense convictions are being released back into society who shouldn't be, Hoyt said that in the first year of the legislation, 1,603 cases were referred to the Office of Mental Health with only 173 of those individuals undergoing psychiatric evaluations. Of that number, 139 were referred to the state attorney general for court proceedings in an attempt to confine them or place them on intensive parole -- an alternative under the confinement law.

Sypnier was never evaluated by a psychiatric examiner, according to information received by the lawmakers.

At present, there are believed to be about 200 sex offenders who have finished their prison terms and are confined at secure state psychiatric hospitals because they have mental abnormalities that make it likely they will reoffend.

State Sen. William T. Stachowski represents the part of Buffalo's East Side where Sypnier currently lives in a halfway house.

"Mr. Sypnier's release into society clearly indicates that our civil confinement system needs to be fine-tuned at least when we consider the potential for a repeat offender to commit these horrendous acts time and again," said Stachowski, D-Lake View.

Also on hand was Assemblywoman Francine DelMonte, D-Niagara Falls. ..Source.. The Buffalo News

1 comment:

Eric Knight said...

One thing that I've NEVER SEEN in all this hoopla about civil commitment:

If the offender is supposedly crazy that he can't be trusted on the street after his sentence is completed, WHY was he in prison in the FIRST PLACE? He should have been judged not guilty by reason of insanity and placed in the facility after the verdict, right?

That alone gives you the answer.