3-23-2011 Nebraska:
LINCOLN — Saying Nebraska's current sex-offender registry law unfairly punishes some minor offenders, a group of state senators wants to remove those offenders' pictures and addresses from a public list.
Supporters of the change include Omaha Sen. Scott Lautenbaugh, typically a hard-liner on crime who has said sexual predators should be banished to a remote island because they can't be rehabilitated,
Yet Lautenbaugh said it's unfair to hang a “scarlet letter” on minor offenders whom the Nebraska State Patrol had deemed at low risk of reoffending and who haven't committed repeat crimes.
“I don't think we should ruin their lives,” Lautenbaugh said.
Sen. Brad Ashford, also of Omaha, said, “We have to balance punishment with fairness.”
Lautenbaugh, Ashford and Sen. Colby Coash of Lincoln on Tuesday spoke in favor of changing state law after testimony last week during a public hearing before the Legislature's Judiciary Committee.
Some of those testifying, including people whose criminal offenses occurred as long as 16 years ago, said their families were harassed and shunned because of past mistakes. Their occupations and reputations face ruin, they said, because their faces and addresses are listed on the state's sex-offender website.
Prior to passage of Legislative Bill 285 in 2009, only the names of sex offenders deemed by the State Patrol as most likely to reoffend were publicized.
Those who had committed minor offenses and were considered at low risk of reoffending — a Level 1 offender — were required to register with law enforcement agencies, but their information wasn't made public.
LB 285 included Level 1 offenders in new reporting requirements. The state posted their photos and addresses on a website. The photos are to stay for as long as 25 years, and in some cases, for life.
Ashford is having an amendment drafted that would remove from the website Level 1 offenders who committed offenses prior to the enactment of LB 285 and have not reoffended.
Anyone who committed an offense after that date would still have to comply with the more rigorous reporting requirements, and would be subject to having his or her name and photo publicly posted, Ashford said.
Coash said he didn't realize LB 285 was to be retroactive.
Omaha Sen. Pete Pirsch, who sponsored LB 285, said he opposes any return to the old system of having the State Patrol assess a sex offender's potential for reoffending.
“I'm not sure there's any scientific method to guess the capability of a sex offender to reoffend going into the future,” Pirsch said.
Pirsch said he wanted to see any amendments before to deciding whether to support them.
A Nebraska group for convicted sex offenders and their families called Families Affirming Community Safety has lobbied and joined a federal lawsuit to get the current state law reversed.
Rigorous tracking of minor, low-risk offenders diverts attention from true sexual predators, the group says.
The Legislature passed LB 285 to comply with the Adam Walsh Act, a federal measure aimed at apprehending sex offenders. It was named for Adam Walsh, the son of “America's Most Wanted” host John Walsh, who was abducted and murdered in 1981. ..Source.. Paul Hammel, WORLD-HERALD BUREAU
March 23, 2011
Sex-offender list too inclusive?
May 8, 2010
State Pushing for Federal Sex Registry Changes
5-8-2010 Maine:
The federal law's provision regarding juveniles is troublesome, state officials say.
Maine officials are pushing Congress to make changes in the federal sex registry law. Attorney General Janet Mills says particularly troublesome is the federal requirement that juvenile sex offenders be placed on state registries for life. "All states have a great deal of difficulty imposing the very tough restrictions on juveniles that that act calls for," she says.
Maine Sen. Susan Collins hears the concerns. "Those issues do need to be recognized and worked out, but I think it's important to remember that this law serves a very important purpose as far as protecting our children."
Under the current "Adam's Law," the state has until July 1st to apply for another waiver from the U.S. Justice Department. Mills thinks the waiver will be granted.
But as the law currently stands, the state will face sanctions a year from July if it does not change its sex-offender registry to comply. ..Source.. by Maine Public Broadcasting Network
February 24, 2010
More kids on registry; fewer being labeled
2-24-2010 Ohio:
Every year, more teens are added to Ohio's sex offender registry, slapped with labels that will follow them past their 18th birthday and mark them as potential threats to their neighbors.
But if teen sex offenders are indeed dangerous, how come they're being locked up far less often than in the past?
The answer may be a 2008 law that was designed to crack down on sex offenders, but may have the opposite effect when it comes to juveniles.
Data from the Ohio Attorney General's Office and the Department of Youth Services shows that for every two juveniles made to register for the first time in 2008 and 2007, one kid was locked up for a sex offense.
However, last year, only 88 minors were locked up for sex offenses while 290 entered Ohio's registry network. The overall population in Ohio's juvenile prisons has declined as well, but the percentage of inmate youths committed for sex offenses is at its lowest in at least five years.
In 2006, 193 juveniles were placed into custody for a sex crime. Admissions for rape numbered 120 that year. The vast majority were not forcible sexual assaults, but sex acts between two teens where one of the parties was younger than the age of consent, or 13.
Last year, 50 of the 88 lockups were for rape, a 240 percent decrease in that offense from three years earlier. The number of age of consent rapes by teens dropped from 72 in 2006 to 34 in 2009.
This is despite Ohio's implementation in 2008 of the Adam Walsh Act, the federal government's uniform policy on sexual offender registry. Or maybe because of it, according to some in the judicial system.
The Adam Walsh Act requires anyone 16 or older who is convicted of a sex crime to be added to the state's sex offender registry. As a result, some judges and prosecutors are changing charges to avoid registration requirements they say are too harsh to be applied uniformly to every juvenile.
Usually, that means "sex" disappears from the sex crimes.
For example, a sexual imposition charge can turn into an assault because both deal with unwanted contact. Or a pandering obscenity allegation for "sexting" -- sending lewd images of minors with a cell phone -- can morph into a charge that punishes the teen for using a cell phone in a criminal act.
"There are lots of charges that capture the essence of what you're seeing without putting the extra word in that says, 'This is sex'," said Judge Steven Michael of the Jackson County Juvenile/Probate Court.
But even convictions for a sex offense in the lowest tier -- Tier I -- can be a way to avoid teenage transgressions following offenders into adulthood.
The law allows for judges to lower classification after a juvenile's incarceration or probation is completed. So if a judge designates a teen a Tier I offender and orders him to complete six months of probation, the label can be removed a half-year later. If they're still under 18 at that point, the teen successfully avoids inclusion on the online, publicly accessed registry.
A snapshot of the registry database in each of the last three Decembers shows that the ranks of Tier I offenders have grown significantly. In December 2007, the state attorney general's office was watching 148 teens in that lesser designation. By Dec. 15, 2009, the state had 290 Tier I teens to monitor. The number of teens who committed more serious sex crimes has trended only slightly upward.
Richland County Assistant Prosecutor Bambi Couch Page, who handles many of the department's sex crime cases, said there are cases where the consequences of giving a juvenile a sex offender label that lasts into adulthood might be the wrong thing to do.
Defense attorneys, prosecutors and judges "don't necessarily want this person at age 14, 15, 16 stuck in these categories that have a lifelong effect," Page said. "There has been a whole lot of maneuvering in the juvenile system."
Michael, who also is president of the Ohio Association of Juvenile Court Judges, said the law, if applied to the letter, would cost good kids who exercised bad judgment a chance to fully realize their potential as productive citizens.
"(A teen's) judgment is being formed during those years and they're going to make some stupid decisions," he said. "I think that's why you're starting to see prosecutors and judges and players in the system having a real conversation around what we are really seeing. Is this someone a sex offender? A dangerous person that we really do need to make other people aware of?"
Counselors are learning more about how to treat child sex offenders every day. They are not lost causes who need to be branded and kept away from other kids, said Penny Wyman, executive director of the Ohio Association of Child Caring Agencies.
Counseling for juveniles with sexual behavior issues is far more successful than it is for adults.
A 2006 report by the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers stated that with appropriate short-term outpatient treatment, juvenile sex offenders are at no greater risk to commit another sex offense than any other child receiving mental health assistance.
The Adam Walsh Act was crafted with the best intentions, but may be creating a second set of victims, Wyman said. If teens aren't a danger to others, she said, they shouldn't be labeled as sex offenders well into adulthood.
A well-publicized example is sexting, which would be legally construed as the felony charge of pandering obscenity involving a minor.
"Sexting opens the doorway for virtually every teenager in America to become a sex offender," Wyman said.
Legislators say sexting wasn't something that was anticipated when the law was drafted.
Maggie Ostrowski, spokeswoman for State Sen. Bill Harris, R-Ashland, said the Walsh Act was designed to protect kids from repeat sex offenders. Its application to child offenders should be up to the officials closest to the cases, despite the rigidity of the law for 16- and 17-year-olds.
"In his view, it's important to give our prosecutors the flexibility to prosecute cases and to accept pleas given the facts and circumstances of each case," Ostrowski said.
A bill was introduced in April by Cincinnati-area Rep. Ron Maag, R-Salem Township, to reduce sexting by teens to a first-degree misdemeanor.
At its heart, the Adam Walsh Act and its predecessors -- the Jacob Wetterling Act and Megan's Law -- are designed to protect children. Each is named after a victimized child.
Michael said that laws crafted in the spirit of protecting our most vulnerable can go too far because of their near-universal appeal.
Supporting sex offender legislation, or any law that purports to be tough on crime, rarely hurts re-election prospects, lawmakers said.
"I'm not familiar with anyone ever losing an election because they were too tough on crime," said Rep. Dan Dodd, D-Newark. "You're not going to lose support by going too far ... sometimes that does create bad law." ..Source.. RUSS ZIMMER • CentralOhio.com
December 19, 2009
Sex registries for youth: better politics than policy
12-19-2009 Tennessee:
Tennessee Voices
Preventing sexual violence should be a priority for policymakers and the criminal and juvenile justice systems.
However, the bill filed by state Sen. Diane Black and state Rep. Debra Maggart to require the registration of youths convicted of sex offenses will do little to secure the safety of Tennessee children, will have long-lasting consequences for youths on registries and may actually reduce public safety.
The legislators say that their bill will help bring Tennessee into compliance with the federal Adam Walsh Act. Around the country, there is growing discontent with this unfunded and ill-conceived federal mandate. Certainly, youth need to be held accountable for their actions; but registration that can last for decades or a lifetime is not an effective or fair way to do this.
Youths are particularly amenable to change and should not be treated the same as adults. That is the rationale behind a separate system of juvenile justice, which caters to the specific needs of youths.
Registries in effect re-punish youths and may hinder success when they return to the community. Youths on registries often experience rejection from peer groups and positive adult role models and are, therefore, more likely to associate with anti-social peers. They are also less likely to attend positive activities like school and church. The online display of personal information may even put youths or their families at risk.
Furthermore, the fear of having a child on the registry may make parents less likely to seek needed help or treatment for their child.
Registration may hurt a young person's ability to maintain employment or access education and housing and can hinder his or her ability to access the re-entry services shown to be critical for young people who are trying to turn their lives around.
Registries also create a false sense of security for families who rely on them to identify people who might be a threat.
Registration requirements also overburden law enforcement and take away resources that can be more effectively used to protect public safety. States attempting to implement the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act have seen law enforcement tasked with database management rather than community protection.
Most people are under the misperception that children are usually sexually assaulted by strangers and that registries are an effective prevention strategy. Sadly, the young woman who spoke at the bill's announcement represents the reality that 93 percent of sexual assaults on children are committed by family members and acquaintances who likely wouldn't be on a registry.
For too long, public policies around sex offenses have been driven by politics and misperceptions. The Adam Walsh Act is one example that will have particularly toxic results, especially for youths.
Instead of passing ineffective, punitive legislation such as the registry, resources should be focused on educating the public about the realities of sex offenses and how to protect their families from sexual violence, and providing better services for troubled youths.
We all want our children and communities to be safe, but the sex-offender registry makes better politics than policy. ..Source.. Tracy Velazquez is executive director at the Justice Policy Institute, a Washington-based organization that published Registering Harm: How Juvenile Sex Offender Registries Fail Youth Communities.
September 30, 2009
Group issues report on sex-offender registration for juvenile offenses
9-30-2009 National:
With Ohio becoming the first state to come into substantial compliance with the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) that is part of the Adam Walsh Act, the Justice Policy Institute, a national organization focusing on juvenile and criminal justice issues, warned that compliance with the Act will provide little in the way of public safety benefits at substantial costs, particularly for those who must now be on sex offender registries for juvenile offenses.
To provide policymakers with more information about the negative impacts of SORNA, JPI is broadly releasing their report "Registering Harm: How Sex Offense Registries Fail Youth and Communities". (This report had a limited release in 2008.) Registering Harm concludes that while the prevention of sexual violence should be a priority for policymakers and the criminal justice system, the registration and community notification of youth convicted of sex offenses is unlikely to improve public safety, can have a lifetime of negative effects on a young person, and often penalizes an entire family. Furthermore, advocates say placing youth on sex offense registries is contrary to the purpose of the juvenile justice system, and SORNA has been found to be unconstitutional and in violation of children’s rights.
“There is a growing concern that this well-intentioned legislation is having serious negative consequences, particularly for young people,” said Tracy Velázquez, executive director of JPI. “Our juvenile justice system was set up to give delinquent youth a second chance; due to the very public and punitive nature of the online registries, the Act denies them this chance.”
“Courts have ruled as recently as this month that SORNA is unconstitutional as it is retroactively punitive,” added Velázquez, referring to the recent ruling by the ninth circuit court. “We know that states are being pressured to pass this legislation through threats of withholding federal dollars. However, in light of these serious civil rights issues, we urge state lawmakers to resist rushing into compliance, and to instead focus on insisting that their federal counterparts change this flawed legislation.”
Registering Harm examines the public safety implications associated with implementing SORNA, which would expand registries already established at state levels, requiring states to list all registrants on a national online database and to include children convicted of certain sex offenses. Although originally all states were required to come into compliance with SORNA in July 2009 or face losing a portion of their Justice Assistance Grant Program funds, no states were in compliance at that time and the U.S. Attorney general extended the deadline for compliance to July 2010. Most troubling, according to the report, is that under SORNA youth as young as 14 would be placed on registries, making them more likely to experience rejection from peer groups and positive social networks and therefore more likely to associate with delinquent or troubled peers. Additionally, as the Ninth Circuit Court pointed out, the registration of adult for decades-old juvenile offenses “threatens to disrupt the stability of their lives and to ostracize them from their communities,” notwithstanding years of living law-abiding and productive lives.
The report also notes that many of the offenses committed by youth are normative teenage behaviors. These behaviors are now criminalized and punished in ways that can last a lifetime. The report also concludes what similar reports, such as “The Pursuit of Safety” by the Vera Institute of Justice, also find, which is that registries do little to protect public safety, and may even endanger youth. And while states may lose federal dollars by not complying, JPI’s analysis shows that meeting the Act’s many requirements will likely cost more. SORNA implementation would leave law enforcement tasked with database management rather than community protection.
“Rather than educating the public about general practices for keeping children and communities safe from sexual violence, this Act encourages a disproportionate allocation of resources and inappropriate focus on registries and the people on them,” said Velázquez. She added that in some states, people can be placed on registries for offenses such as public urination or lewd bumper stickers on their car, which would make it difficult for people using the registry to determine who could be a possible threat to their families or neighborhoods.
Key findings in Registering Harm include:- The Act misallocates resources to a fraction of sexual violence incidences. Registries are designed to warn the public, and particularly parents, of “stranger danger;” however, sexual assaults are seldom committed by strangers. The Bureau of Justice Statistics found that more than nine in 10 sexual offenses against children were committed by either a family member or acquaintance. In addition, 87 percent of the people arrested for a sex offense in 1997 had not been previously convicted of a sex offense and therefore would not appear on a registry. The resource misallocation caused by the expansion of registries in the Act has an especially significant impact given the budget crises faced in many states.
- Overbroad registration or notification practices make it difficult for the public to determine who on the registry may pose a public safety threat and who doesn’t. Even the tier system of SORNA still provides little context to people who receive notification or view a public registry. In a review of all state registries, Human Rights Watch found that only five states provided enough understandable information on online registries for the public to be able to interpret the charge and the age of both the registrant and the victim.
- Registration and notification overburdens law enforcement. State and federal laws are enacted at the local level, leaving local law enforcement agencies and corrections departments to implement and shoulder the burden of registration and notification legislation. Law enforcement is forced to dedicate a great deal of time and resources to monitoring people on the registries, finding people who have failed to register, and constantly ensuring that information on the registry is correct.
- Registries and notification create barriers to education, employment, housing, and other social networks and outlets, making it difficult to live successfully in the community. Many states compound the barriers posed by registries with residency restrictions. This leads to increased risk of probation or parole violations or illegal behavior, which may lead to further incarceration.
- Public dollars could be better spent on effective prevention strategies that more comprehensively address ways to reduce sexual violence and abuse. The report recommends that policymakers on federal, state, and local levels employ proactive preventative strategies like educating communities about effective ways to prevent sexual violence, which can be a more effective way of increasing public safety.
“Our public policies should be driven by what works to keep people safe,” added Velázquez. “SORNA is one example of well-intentioned but unsound legislation that will have particularly toxic results, especially for youth. We need to move past emotion and rhetoric, and start putting in place more rational, effective policies for all.” ..Source.. by Chris Graham
August 4, 2009
TN- Should Juvy Sex Offenders Be On A Database?
8-4-2009 Tennessee:
27 States Have Some Type Of Juvenile Registry
NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- Should children who commit sex crimes be listed on a registry just like the adults? Should their names, faces and addresses be on public view?
Some say that having their name in the public destroys a chance to turn their young life around.
It is a serious debate with millions of dollars at stake.
Congress passed what's called the Adam Walsh act in 2006, which requires states to put certain information on their sex offender registries.
Over the past few years, lawmakers have been bringing the registry into compliance by doing things like adding sex offenders' online identities and changing registry requirements.
As it stands right now, the state must create a juvenile registry to comply with federal law.
"These teenagers that are committing violent sex offenses. This is not about sex play. This is the rape of a child and that is a serious sex offense," said Rep. Debra Maggart.
Maggart introduced a bill for the past two years to bring the state into compliance.
It would mandate that 14-18 year olds that commit the most serious offenses would go on a registry.
This bill is consistent with the Adam Walsh Act, which does not require ALL juvenile offenders to be on a registry!
If it doesn't pass, it could cost the state millions in grants that go to local law enforcement.
"We're gonna lose money. We're going to use burn grant dollar, and we need every dime we can get our hands on in the state," said Maggart.
But child advocates have fought the bill, saying that 90 percent of juvenile sex offenders can be rehabilitated and would destroy their lives.
"Putting children on the sex offender registry is bad public policy because it does not increase public safety, and it has the great prospect of ruining the lives of children who can turn their lives around and be very productive citizens," said Linda O'Neal, the executive director of the Tennessee Commission on Children and Youth.
They are hoping Congress will change the federal requirements.
"We hope once Congress gets beyond some of the major issues they've had to deal with, the stimulus and healthcare, so forth, that they will focus on this issue," said O'Neal.
The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation had asked for an extension to comply with the Adam Walsh Act, and U.S. attorney general Eric Holder granted an extension for every state.
At this time, not a single state is in full compliance with the law. Twenty seven states already have some type of juvenile registry. ..Source.. by Cara Kumari
August 3, 2009
OK- Add Juveniles to Sex Offender Lists or Lose Grants
8-3-2009 Oklahoma:
The state could see a 10 percent decrease in their grant if they don't start adding juveniles to the sex offender lists.
States DO NOT have to add juveniles, the Adam Walsh Act requires adding ONLY those who are 14 and up and have committed violent crimes as defined in federal law. See:A careful review of the following sections of the Adam Walsh Act will show that, NOT ALL JUVENILES are to be added to the sex offender registry. So, if a juvenile is 13 years old or younger, -AND- does not meet the following criteria, they will not be added to the registry.SEC. 111. RELEVANT DEFINITIONS, INCLUDING AMIE ZYLA EXPANSION OF SEX OFFENDER DEFINITION AND EXPANDED INCLUSION OF CHILD PREDATORS..
In this title the following definitions apply:
(1) SEX OFFENDER- The term `sex offender' means an individual who was convicted of a sex offense.
(8) CONVICTED AS INCLUDING CERTAIN JUVENILE ADJUDICATIONS- The term `convicted' or a variant thereof, used with respect to a sex offense, includes adjudicated delinquent as a juvenile for that offense, but only if the offender is 14 years of age or older at the time of the offense and the offense adjudicated was comparable to or more severe than aggravated sexual abuse (as described in section 2241 of title 18, United States Code), or was an attempt or conspiracy to commit such an offense.
Congress passed the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act in 2006. The Byrne Justice Assitance Grant funding helps with law enforcement programs.
The legislature is looking at an interim study proposal, which includes concerns on public safety.
The executive director at the Office of Juvenile Affairs said that complying with the act may not even be worth it, because the state would be losing even more money with costly programs added to the system.
"Complying with the Walsh Act may cost more than the grants that's going to be saved," said Gene Christian, Executive Director at the Office of Juvenile Affairs.
The state currently does not have any registered juvenile sex offenders. The Office of Juvenile Affairs sees an average of 90 teens committing sex crimes each year.
The state has until the summer of 2010 to come into compliance with the act. ..Source.. by KSBI News
July 13, 2009
OK- Oklahoma must add teens to sex offender list or lose grants
The media information is wrong, the Adam Walsh Act DOES NOT REQUIRE juveniles to be added to the registry. What the Act says is, CERTAIN JUVENILES must be added to the registry, those convicted of specific types of serious offenses if they are 14 or older.
7-13-2009 Oklahoma:
Act says sex offender registry must include juveniles
Changes could be coming to Oklahoma’s sex offender registry in order for the state to stay eligible for some federal grants.
The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 requires states to add juveniles to their sex offender lists or lose some vital grants.
A careful review of the following sections of the Adam Walsh Act will show that, NOT ALL JUVENILES are to be added to the sex offender registry. So, if a juvenile is 13 years old or younger, -AND- does not meet the following criteria, they will not be added to the registry.SEC. 111. RELEVANT DEFINITIONS, INCLUDING AMIE ZYLA EXPANSION OF SEX OFFENDER DEFINITION AND EXPANDED INCLUSION OF CHILD PREDATORS..
In this title the following definitions apply:
(1) SEX OFFENDER- The term `sex offender' means an individual who was convicted of a sex offense.
(8) CONVICTED AS INCLUDING CERTAIN JUVENILE ADJUDICATIONS- The term `convicted' or a variant thereof, used with respect to a sex offense, includes adjudicated delinquent as a juvenile for that offense, but only if the offender is 14 years of age or older at the time of the offense and the offense adjudicated was comparable to or more severe than aggravated sexual abuse (as described in section 2241 of title 18, United States Code), or was an attempt or conspiracy to commit such an offense.
The Oklahoma Coalition for Sex Offender Management has decried the suggestion, arguing research shows a low recidivism rate for juvenile sex offenders.
The issue could be a moot point.
There are no names on Oklahoma’s juvenile sex offender registry, even though an average of 90 teenagers have been convicted of sex offenses every year since 2001. There have been 34 so far in 2009, according to the state Office of Juvenile Affairs.
That office has maintained a sex offender list as mandated by a 2001 state law, but director Gene Christian said no offenders have been deemed dangerous to the community by a judge.
Christian, a former prosecutor, said he does not know details of the Walsh Act’s requirements, but he is not opposed to putting juveniles on the sex offender registry — if it is done as mandated by Oklahoma law.
He said teens who fail in treatment are likely to end up in prison, so they should be placed on the public registry for sex offenders.
Oklahoma County Public Defender Bob Ravitz doesn’t like the notion of putting juveniles on the sex offender registry unless they’ve been certified as adults by a judge.
He said anything else is counter to the goals of the juvenile justice system, which is supposed to rehabilitate young offenders.
"If you put them on the offender list, you brand them for life,” Ravitz said.
Ravitz said following federal mandates has not worked out well for the criminal justice system in the past.
He pointed to laws meant to keep offenders in prison for at least 85 percent of their sentence. Such laws have been rescinded in other states, but continue to keep Oklahoma’s prisons full.
"It makes no sense at all,” he said. "Too much meddling in the state’s business is not good for anybody.” ..Source.. by JAY F. MARKS
January 11, 2009
TN- Sex offender registry may list juveniles
1-11-2009 Tennessee:
When he was a young boy, he was sexually abused. At age 16, his parents learned, he'd molested a young girl himself.
He was criminally charged and convicted, and because of that, got treatment. But his name was never part of a public registry. Had that happened, his mother said, the boy might have forgone treatment and headed down a much darker path of abuse.
"This is something that just happens. If you are raised up in that culture, you will act out (sexually)," said the mother, a 52-year-old Williamson County woman. Her name and her son's name are being withheld because The Tennessean does not identify victims of sex crimes.
This year, state legislators will be asked to add juveniles convicted of sex crimes to Tennessee's public sex offender registries. The legislation would represent the last piece of a broad set of sex crime laws ordered up by the federal government to better shield children from sexual and violent crimes.
And if passed by an April deadline - which the state says is unlikely to be met - it would ensure Tennessee continues to get all the federal law enforcement funding coming to it.
A flurry of new Tennessee laws have brought the state closer to compliance to what's known as the Adam Walsh Act, named for a 6-year-old who was murdered in 1981.
No bill submitted yet
A proposal to complete the missing piece, adding offenders under age 18 to Tennessee's sex offender database, would be included in a package of proposals legislators will receive from the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation this year.
Even if Tennessee lawmakers receive it warmly, TBI spokeswoman Kristin Helm said, it is doubtful that the legislature would approve the registry change by the April deadline.
The state has asked for a one-year extension to get the last pieces of the law in place; without it, federal funding for law enforcement could be lost.
Though the federal government has pushed for the law, adding young offenders to public criminal databases has been controversial across the U.S.
Prosecutors back listing
A state prosecutors group says offenders under age 18 should show up on the registries if they are convicted of sex crimes.
"They are as much of a threat to the people of this state as an adult," said Wally Kirby, director of the Tennessee District Attorneys General Conference. "Most of the kids who commit crimes like this ... you are talking about kids 16, 17, 18 years old.
"I think, quite frankly, we've bent over backwards to protect juveniles," he said. "You have got to have some consequences."
Kids may not get help
Others say making young offenders' names public can impair treatment that could keep them from committing more serious crimes as adults, especially when the accused were once victims of abuse themselves.
"I can see why they want that law - everybody wants their child to be safe," said the Williamson County mother, who was herself the victim of sexual abuse at the hands of her ex-husband. She said the criminal charge got her son into a treatment program, and as an adult today he has a healthy family life.
"If that law had been in effect, it would have so stigmatized my son," perhaps to the point where he would have shunned counseling, the woman said.
Once publicly branded as sex offenders, young people may not reach out for help, said Rachel Freeman, vice president of clinical services for the Sexual Assault Center of Nashville.
"We'd hate to see a registry like this get in the way of treatment," Freeman said. "The stigma that can follow these kids, we don't want it to be there if it's not necessary." ..News Source.. by Written by Clay Carey, The Tennessean
September 22, 2008
CO- Sex-convict database perplexes
9-22-2008 Colorado:
When President Bush signed the Adam Walsh Act into law, it required states to contribute to a national database of sex offenders with more current and stringent registration requirements.
But states and American Indian tribes are having a tough time implementing some of the requirements of the 2006 law — such as making the names and addresses of juvenile sex offenders available on the Internet.
In Colorado, officials have met for more than a year to decide whether to comply with the Adam Walsh Act by July or lose $240,000 in federal funding.
And it may be worth losing the money since it could cost more to fulfill the law's requirements.
"I think at this point, the committee has not reached a final conclusion," said Chris Lobanov-Rostovsky, program director of Colorado's Sex Offender Management Board. "We are looking at the fact that this is an unfunded mandate. The other issue is that the committee and the state are committed to doing what is best for safety and victim protection. And looking at this act, is it going to further the cause?"
The Justice Policy Institute, a Washington think tank that promotes alternatives to prison incarceration, has estimated that the law would cost Colorado $7.8 million to implement.
Lobanov-Rostovsky said that figure sounds too high — unless it figures in the cost to all local law enforcement statewide — but he has not come up with his own cost estimate yet.
This fall, the committee is expected to present a preliminary recommendation to Gov. Bill Ritter to decide on compliance.
"The money is not necessarily there, and does it make sense above and beyond that even if the money were there?" Lobanov-Rostovsky asked.
The Adam Walsh Act was named after a 6-year-old Florida boy who was kidnapped and murdered in 1981. His father is John Walsh, host of television's "America's Most Wanted."
Under the law, sex offenders classified as the highest risk must update their registration every three months for life or face felony prosecution.
The Colorado U.S. Attorney's Office has filed seven cases against people charged with failing to follow the restrictions of the Adam Walsh Act — most recently, the case against Alden Yelloweagle, a 49-year- old sex offender from Montezuma County.
In 2005, Yelloweagle was convicted of abusive sexual contact and was ordered to serve a year and a day in federal prison. When he got out, Yelloweagle was instructed to register with the Montezuma County Sheriff's Office and did, but he failed to re-register as required under the law, according to court records.
Yelloweagle faces up to 10 years in federal prison if he is convicted, more time for failing to re-register than he got for his original conviction.
Erin Runnion, whose 5-year- old daughter Samantha was kidnapped, sexually assaulted and killed in California in 2002, says it is absolutely essential to complete the national database.
"By and large, once convicted, sex offenders move, and they move a lot," Runnion said. "And if sex offenders move, they are going to states where states don't keep on track, so the interstate communication is absolutely critical to knowing where they are."
Runnion says states can apply for grants through the Department of Justice's Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering and Tracking.
She also said citizens should get involved.
"They can and they should write to their congressmen and senators," she said. "Tell them, 'You passed it. Now fund it.' Give states the appropriations they need to come into compliance with the registry."
The law not only mandates an updated national database, it also requires classification of sex offenders based on their conviction.
In Colorado, sex offenders are classified based on risk to the community. And not all states have the same charges or same coding for offenses, but they all have to become uniform under the act.
For example, Colorado does not have a specific charge that identifies an offender whose victim was under age 12.
"We would have to shift over to a charge-based system," Lobanov-Rostovsky said. "We would have to change our sexual-assault statutes, and those are some of the challenges."
Also under the law, American Indian tribes were forced to decide whether to let states take over registration of sex offenders or get their own databases in compliance with the national system.
"A lot of these policies are drawn and dictated out with American Indians," said Janelle Doughty, director of the Department of Justice and Regulatory Affairs for the Southern Ute tribe. "We are used to it. Tribes really do not get consulted at all. Congress passes a law, and we have to figure out how we are going to be proactive and make it work."
Doughty says there are federal grant funds available to tribes, but the money may not stretch far enough.
The Southern Ute Indians decided to maintain their own database and purchased computer software without grant funding, she said.
One of the biggest controversies for states to deal with is whether to upload information about juvenile sex offenders into the database, such as their address, the school they attend and a photograph.
Currently in Colorado, information on juvenile sex offenders can be obtained from individual police departments that keep the registration on file or by ordering the Colorado Bureau of Investigation's CD-ROM of sex offenders.
But the public cannot access information about juveniles in Colorado on the Internet.
"The legislature felt that juvenile offenders should be given a second chance and not identified in such a public way," said Lance Clem, spokesman for the Department of Public Safety.
Nastassia Walsh, a research assistant at the Justice Policy Institute who analyzed the costs and requirements of the Adam Walsh Act, strongly opposes juveniles being listed on the national database.
"We are extremely disturbed that we could be putting kids as young as 14 on this database," she said. "What we would like instead is for people on the registry not to get this sort of ostracism and get them the services and opportunities to help reduce recidivism."
Nastassia Walsh said a national sex-offender registry is not the answer and that money should be spent on rehabilitation or other crime-fighting programs.
"There really is no evidence to show that this is an effective way to enforce public safety," she said. "It is just political rhetoric to keep kids safe, but it is turning into a logistical nightmare." ..News Source.. by Felisa Cardona, The Denver Post
February 21, 2008
Is Ricky Really a Sex Offender?
California’s registry for life may soon include promiscuous kids
2-21-2008 California:
When Ricky was 16, he went to a teen club and met a girl named Amanda, who said she was the same age. They hit it off and were eventually having sex. At the time Ricky thought it was a pretty normal high school romance.
Two years later, Ricky is a registered sex offender, and his life is destroyed.
Amanda turned out to be 13. Ricky was arrested, tried as an adult, and pleaded guilty to the charge of lascivious acts with a child, which is a class D felony in Iowa. It is not disputed that the sex was consensual, but intercourse with a 13-year-old is illegal in Iowa.
Ricky was sentenced to two years probation and 10 years on the Iowa online sex offender registry. Ricky and his family have since moved to Oklahoma, where he will remain on the state’s public registry for life.
Being labeled a sex offender has completely changed Ricky’s life, leading him to be kicked out of high school, thrown out of parks, taunted by neighbors, harassed by strangers, and unable to live within 2,000 feet of a school, day-care center or park. He is prohibited from going to the movies or mall with friends because it would require crossing state borders, which he cannot do without permission from his probation officer. One of Ricky’s neighbors called the cops on him, yelled and cursed at him, and videotaped him every time he stepped outside, Ricky said.
“It affects you in every way,” he said. “You’re scared to go out places. You’re on the Internet, so everybody sees your picture.”
His mother, Mary, said the entire family has felt the ramifications of Ricky being labeled a sex offender. His younger brother has been ridiculed at school and cannot have friends over to the house; his stepfather has been harassed; the parents’ marriage has been under tremendous pressure; and strangers used to show up at their door to badger the family. One neighbor came to the house and told Mary he wasn’t going to leave them alone until they took their “child rapist” away, so they moved, she said.
California is currently deciding if it will comply with a federal sex offender act that would put adolescent sex offenders as young as 14 on a national public registry, like the one Ricky is on in Oklahoma. Supporters say the act would improve public safety, but critics argue it would stigmatize thousands of teenagers. The law, called the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, would require states to submit information on youth deemed delinquent in juvenile court of aggravated sexual abuse to the registry.
Juveniles affected by the act would range from those who used force or drugs to rape another person, to those who have had any sexual contact with a child under the age of 12. If a 14-year-old touches an 11-year-old’s penis, the 14-year-old would be eligible for the public registry.
Human rights advocates and even some prominent sex crime prevention groups warn this is one more act in a long list of sex-offender laws across the country that appeals to voters but is ineffective and counterproductive. They argue that almost all sex offender laws in the United States fail to solve the problem of sex crimes because they drive people underground, block paths to treatment and focus on a high-profile case, like that of 6-year-old Adam Walsh, who was abducted from a Florida department store and killed in 1981, and miss the fuller picture of sexual violence.
A few heinous, high-profile sex crimes capture the media’s attention, and the result is more Draconian sex-offender laws, such as Megan’s Law and Jessica’s Law, said Sarah Tofte of Human Rights Watch, which recently released a report on sex-offender laws called “No Easy Answers: Sex Offender Laws in the U.S.”
“We have created these laws and we apply them to anyone convicted of a sex crime regardless of their risk to the community,” Tofte said.
Megan’s Law requires public registration for adult sex offenders. If Jessica’s Law,
approved by voters in 2006, overcomes challenges in court, it would prohibit adult registered sex offenders from living 2,000 feet within a school or park and require those paroled from prison to wear lifetime GPS monitors. Unlike the Adam Walsh Act, Megan’s Law and Jessica’s Law generally do not affect registered juveniles, according to California Deputy Attorney General Janet Neeley.
While the media focuses on the stories of the child being raped and killed by a stranger, the Human Rights Watch report states that 80-90 percent of the offenses against children are committed by someone the victim knows.
If California complies with the Adam Walsh Act, the law would be retroactive, and the offenders would be listed on the registry for life. They would be classified as Tier III offenders and forced to register with law enforcement authorities every three months, or risk being charged with a felony and going to prison for at least one year.
The act, sponsored by Wisconsin Republican Congressman F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. and 37 co-sponsors – including former Florida representative Mark Foley – was signed into law by President Bush on July 27, 2006, and gives states three years to comply or risk losing 10 percent of federal Byrne money, which are law enforcement grants worth $5 million in California. The Department of Justice is formulating the final guidelines.
Congressional co-sponsors of the law and crime-victim advocates have hailed the bill as an opportunity to improve community safety by increasing penalties for sex crimes, better tracking of sex offenders, and making it harder for predators to reach children on the Internet.
“The Adam Walsh Act intends to register convicted sexual offenders, 14 and older, who have committed the most violent sexual abuses,” said California Congressman Ken Calvert, a Republican from Riverside, in an e-mail. “If a juvenile has committed such a crime, the safety of our community and children supersedes the rights of the juvenile who, at the age of 14, understands the difference between right and wrong.”
A father pleas for
harsh penalties
Child-protection advocates argue that it is more important to hold juvenile sex offenders responsible for their actions than to worry about them being stigmatized by the registry or punished too harshly.
“We have to put the safety of our kids before the civil rights of someone who’s already proven they will hurt a kid,” said Mark Zyla, who became an activist for tougher sex offender laws after his two daughters were sexually assaulted in separate instances. “Being on the registry doesn’t keep people from rehabilitating; it doesn’t keep them from getting a job. It may be more difficult, but that’s part of the consequence of hurting a young child.”
Zyla’s daughter Amie was violently sexually assaulted by a 14-year-old, Joshua Wade, when she was eight. Wade was a family friend and attacked Amie, who is now 20, during a sleepover party at her house, Mark Zyla said. Wade was tried as a juvenile and sent to a juvenile detention center. But because his record was sealed, he was able to later get a job at a summer camp, where he went on to assault more young girls. He has since been sentenced to 25 years in prison.
The Zylas helped pass a law in their home state of Wisconsin to enable law enforcement officials to release information on juvenile sex offenders if they pose a threat to society. They then lobbied Congress to pass the federal Adam Walsh Act. If states comply with the Adam Walsh Act, Mark Zyla said, local law-enforcement agencies would know about juvenile sex offenders like Wade and be able to inform schools and places of employment.
Los Angeles Police Department detectives said registries significantly help them track down sex offenders. If they have an unsolved sex crime, they can take the description of the suspect, plug it into the database and look for a match, said Detective Diane Webb, a supervisor of LAPD’s sex-offender registration and tracking program.
The DNA and registration databases enable detectives to clear old cases and find patterns of crime, said Detective Jesse Alvarado of LAPD’s rape special section.
The registries also help inform the public, Webb said.
“Not only does registration give law enforcement a first place to look, it also provides information to the public,” she said. She added that people should be allowed to know if sex offenders live in their community so they can, at the very least, decide if they want to date them or have them baby-sit their children.
The detectives disagree on whether the registry should include juveniles, who commit 17 percent of all sex offenses and about a third of all sex offenses against children, according to the National Center on Sexual Behavior of Youth. Alvarado said he thinks it would be helpful to have a database like the Adam Walsh one for juvenile offenders. “Giving us an ability to look for somebody would always be a good thing,” Alvarado said.
Webb said she agreed with juvenile justice experts that juveniles should be treated differently from adults.
One of the reasons the law came into effect was because of the more than 100,000 missing or non-compliant sex offenders. They are part of the 603,000 registered sex offenders nationwide, according to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
“When they’re on the run and they’re not compliant, they become more dangerous,” Mark Zyla said. “They’re not getting their treatment and they’re free to do whatever they want.”
Supporters also said juveniles would not be stigmatized for life because a section of the law stipulates that youth deemed delinquent in juvenile court can get off the registry after 25 years if they are not convicted of another sex crime and have successfully completed a sex offender treatment program.
However, juvenile justice advocates, public defenders and prominent sex crime prevention groups have
criticized the law, arguing that it would make it harder for youth to reintegrate into society, further break from the tradition of treating children differently from adults, be ineffective, and cost the state millions.
“Imagine writing down the worst thing you ever did when you were a teenager, or an adult, and being forced to put that on a placard on your forehead. This is, in effect, what registration does to these youth,” L.A. County Deputy Public Defender Maureen Pacheco wrote in an e-mail.
“They must disclose these offenses when they apply for school, when they apply for jobs, if they want to get licensed or bonded,” she wrote. “In other words, in all the ways a youth might seek to become rehabilitated, we shut the door.”
The case for leniency
Juvenile justice advocates said they fear the Adam Walsh Act would make it harder to rehabilitate young sex offenders because it would ostracize them from society. There is no direct research showing the psycho-social effects of registering on youth, say experts.
“But common sense would tell you that having your name, picture, and home address on the Internet as a sex offender at age 8, 12, or even 14 could be devastating in terms of peer relationships, community [relations], ability to stay in school, and involvement in church activities,” said Dr. Barbara Bonner, an expert on sex offenses and co-director of the Adolescent Sex Offender Treatment Program at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center.
The law is counterproductive because young people are more likely to be rehabilitated and successful in the future if they get involved with social activities like sports, bands, choir, or a job, she said.
Juvenile justice advocates also criticize the law for treating and punishing youth as adults rather than focusing on rehabilitation. The basic concept of the juvenile justice system is to treat young people differently from adult offenders because they are considered less responsible for their actions and more receptive to rehabilitation and treatment.
Almost every state ensures that if a child is adjudicated or deemed delinquent – juvenile court does not convict youth – he or she does not have to submit information to a public registry, according to Tara Andrews of the Coalition for Juvenile Justice, a national nonprofit comprised of governor-appointed advisory groups. Andrews said she finds the Adam Walsh Act most troublesome because it “reaches out and grabs kids who were adjudicated as juveniles. The Adam Walsh Act sweeps in and says we still want these kids on the registry.”
Critics also fear it will cost millions of dollars to follow and would not be worth the money the state might lose for not complying. If the federal Attorney General’s office finds that California has not made a “good faith conduct” to comply with the Adam Walsh Act, the Attorney General can reduce the federal Byrne funds allocated to that jurisdiction for law enforcement resources.
“We think the cost of compliance might greatly outweigh the benefits of losing 10 percent of the Byrne funds,” said Pacheco.
Critics fear the massive costs will include applying this law to a state as populated as California, complying with the federal classification system and DNA collection.
It costs more to enact a federal act than individual state laws because a federal law does not take into consideration a state’s specific needs and resources, said Robert Coombs of the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault, a statewide coalition of rape crisis centers and prevention programs.
It would also be costly because the categories the federal government uses to distinguish between different levels of sex crimes do not match the ones California uses. The federal act assigns sex offenders to a numbered level, while California uses other distinctions, such as “sexually violent predator.” To comply, California would have to either run two concurrent leveling systems or completely revamp its present system, Coombs said.
Another cost would be gathering the DNA samples of individuals affected by the Adam Walsh Act. Adults and juveniles convicted of any felony or sex offense already have their DNA collected, but the cost for testing DNA samples has exceeded expectations. The Los Angeles Police Department needs $9.3 million to clear up a backlog of untested samples. Since the Adam Walsh Act is retroactive, it would require collection and analysis of DNA samples from adults and juveniles convicted before the DNA regulations, which did not start until 2004.
Supporters of the law argue the high cost of putting the act into effect is worth the safety of the community.
“There just is no higher purpose for government than keeping the public safe,” said Will Smith, State Senator George Runner’s spokesperson. The Antelope Valley Republican sponsored Jessica’s Law.
Recidivism rates fail to prove the law effective or counterproductive, and both advocates and critics of the law use the statistics to support their arguments. Data from the Justice Department shows that 5.3 percent of male sex offenders released from prisons in 15 states in 1994 were rearrested for a new sex crime within three years of release. Juvenile justice advocates, on the other hand, look at recidivism rates among teenagers, which show that the rates of sexual re-offense are substantially lower, at 5 to 18 percent, than the rates for other delinquent behavior, which is 8 to 58 percent, according to the National Center on Sexual Behavior of Youth.
The California Sex Offender Management Board will evaluate the law and might recommend to the legislature and governor whether it should be complied with, according to board chair Suzanne Brown-McBride. The decision rests with Attorney General Jerry Brown, Gov. Schwarzenegger and the Legislature. California is home to 90,000 registered adult sex offenders and 2,528 registered juvenile sex offenders.
“The state is reviewing the act and evaluating the potential impact it will have on the state,” said Gareth Lacy, a Brown spokesman. “California has a long history of setting tough laws mandating sex-offender registration.”
Runner will be watching the outcome. If California’s current laws do not conform to the federal act, the state senator plans to introduce a bill.
Ricky is now 19 and trying to bring some normalcy back to his life. But that’s practically impossible. In between monthly meetings with his probation officer, he’s been trying to find a job.
However, employers haven’t been eager to hire a registered sex offender. He wants to get a college degree, yet that, too, is problematic. He’s worried his classmates would find him on the registry and start harassing him. “I have to watch my back all of the time,” he said. “Once people find out, they panic. They don’t know the real story.” ..more.. by Hanna Ingber Win
February 18, 2008
Sex registry called too harsh for juveniles
New offender law groups teens with adults, regardless of recidivism risk
2-17-2008 Texas:
AUSTIN — Texas officials may soon begin ignoring a new federal sex offender law that would require some juveniles as young as 14 to register on a national Web site.
A federal community notification act approved by Congress and signed by President Bush is so sweeping, it's raising concern among even those who traditionally have pushed for greater public sex offender disclosure.
Scores of prosecutors, victims' rights advocates and normally get-tough lawmakers say provisions of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 are Draconian and costly and may end up harming the victims they're supposed to protect.
"We think our laws are strong enough," said Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, a leading advocate of sex offender registration laws in Texas.
"When the pendulum swings, it tends to swing pretty hard," said Bill Hawkins, chief of the juvenile division of the Harris County District Attorney's Office. "There are an awful lot of sexual assault cases, and then there are kids who engage in sex at an early age. The Adam Walsh Act wants to put them all together."
The law is named for the 6-year-old son, murdered in 1981, of John Walsh, host of America's Most Wanted. The act requires all states to participate in a national sex offender registry and makes no exception for many younger offenders, putting juveniles who engage in consensual sex with children younger than 13 in the same category as armed adult rapists and pedophiles, in some instances for life.
States have until July 2009 to enact the new law's provisions or lose millions of dollars in federal criminal justice funds. The Justice Department is expected to issue final guidelines this spring.
A handful of states have enacted the law's provisions, but others are balking.
Complying is costly
After initially championing the law, state Rep. Jim McReynolds, D-Lufkin, now opposes the juvenile provisions and believes compliance would be a bad financial deal for Texas. It would cost local communities more to enact the stringent requirements, he says, than what the state would earn if it complied.
"It's a financial loser ... an unfunded mandate," McReynolds said.
Texas' sex offender registry has for years included juveniles. But it's not automatic, giving judges broad discretion in deciding which ones are placed there.
Of the more than 47,000 people listed on the state's Department of Public Safety Web site, only 275 are under 18, while 3,853 are registered based on offenses they committed as juveniles, according to DPS data.
Judges would lose all discretion under the federal act. The national registry would include everyone 14 or older convicted of a sex offense.
A 14-year-old boy convicted of having sex with his 12-year-old girlfriend, for example, would be treated the same as a repeat adult predator who attacked a 3-year-old. Both would fall into the most severe category, Tier III, requiring them to register four times a year for at least 25 years and possibly for the rest of their lives.
Unlike adults, juveniles could petition to be removed from the registry after a quarter-century.
"It's based on the offense of conviction and not on the risk level," said Allison Taylor, executive director of Texas' Council on Sex Offender Treatment.
Few seem to have qualms about adding low-risk adult offenders to the rolls, even if they've served their time and haven't committed an offense in years.
Shapiro said putting both low- and high-risk offenders on the database makes communities safer.
"I don't have any problems if they're adults. ... It's much more difficult to change the behavior pattern of a 35- or 40-year-old man," she said.
Branding all juvenile offenders as predators is different, Shapiro and others say, partly because juvenile sex offenders are said to be more capable of rehabilitation. Studies show that less than 10 percent of juveniles who commit sex offenses re-offend as adults.
In that way, the new law "is rounding up all the wrong suspects," said Franklin Zimring, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who directs the school's criminal justice research program.
In a study conducted in Philadelphia, Zimring found that juveniles who committed nonsexual offenses were twice as likely to become adult sex offenders as juveniles who committed sex offenses.
Amie Zyla, 20, is unconvinced by the go-softer-on-juveniles rhetoric. She was 8 when a 14-year-old family friend named Joshua Wade molested her in their Wisconsin town. His case was handled in juvenile court but, because of his age, he was not placed on a registry.
Years later, she learned a now-adult Wade had molested other children. Zyla, who plans to attend a technical school in the fall, believes Wade's later crimes might have been prevented had her community known about what he did to her. That's what she told members of Congress in hearings leading up to passage of the Adam Walsh Act.
Opposite effect
Annette Burrhus-Clay, executive director of the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, says her group believes the juvenile registration provisions would increase, not reduce, sexual assaults by giving families less incentive to turn in young offenders.
"What you think would make it safer for victims would in fact make reporting go down," she said.
There is at least anecdotal evidence for that. A West Texas woman says she regrets ever turning in her son for touching a 15-year-old female relative on several occasions when he was 12. In a recent interview, the mother said she knew her son had boundary problems and wanted to get him help.
The family lived in Idaho at the time, and authorities there assured her that her son's record would be expunged after he completed probation and sex abuse treatment. But three months before his probation ended, the family moved to a small town in West Texas, where authorities said he would have to register for 10 years.
Word filtered through his school, and he was taunted, she said. A teacher told neighbors about the boy's offense, and he dropped out of school.
"What is wrong with our society?" the mother asked. "Do we want to scar these kids for the rest of their lives?"
She's comforted by one thought: If Texas does pass the Adam Walsh Act, her son would not be placed on the national registry because he committed his crime at 12, not 14. ..more.. by
