1-12-16 Vermont:
When Meg McCarthy’s husband went to Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center for chemotherapy, she wasn’t allowed to be with him.
When he was later hospitalized at Springfield Hospital for pneumonia, she could sit by his side, but not touch him.
McCarthy’s husband, 63-year-old Richard Gagnon, was diagnosed with tonsil cancer while serving a 17-year sentence for second degree murder.
“It broke my heart to think of my husband in shackles going to cancer treatment,” McCarthy said. “He was so weak, so tired. What was he going to do?”
Gagnon’s situation is not unique and is likely to become more common.
Vermont’s older prison population has nearly doubled in size over the past 11 years. As of July 1, 2014, 16.1 percent of Vermont inmates were age 50 or older, up from 8.8 percent a decade earlier.
According to Human Rights Watch, Vermont is part of a national trend. Between 2007 and 2010, the number of prisoners age 65 and up grew by 63 percent, while the total incarcerated population increased by just 0.7 percent. The Economist reported in 2013 that a third of American inmates will be over age 55 by 2030.
As inmates age and their medical needs become more complex, lawmakers and state officials are considering whether the state’s correctional system is well-suited to serve the prison population.
Gagnon, who pled guilty to second degree murder three years ago, was in an out-of-state prison in Kentucky when he had a persistent sore throat. He was treated by on-site medical staff, and eventually had an appointment with an oncologist, who confirmed he had cancer on his tonsils and tongue.
The Department of Corrections transferred him back to Vermont, lodging him in Southern State Correctional Facility in Springfield. He began treatment at Dartmouth Hitchcock the day before Thanksgiving last year.
McCarthy says the department told her that she could not be there for Gagnon’s chemotherapy, and she wasn’t allowed to touch him when he was hospitalized with pneumonia, she said.
McCarthy questions the need to keep older people in prison.
“People shouldn’t be incarcerated unless they’re a risk to the community, and I would maintain that people that are 75, 85 years of age and in wheelchairs are not a threat to the community,” McCarthy said. ..Continued.. by Elizabeth Hewitt
Showing posts with label .Vermont. Show all posts
Showing posts with label .Vermont. Show all posts
January 12, 2016
Lawmakers consider options for aging prisoners, including nursing home care
October 29, 2015
Lawyer: Release seniors convicted of sex crimes, murder
MURDER???10-29-15 Vermont:
An attorney who works with Vermont’s aging prison population asked lawmakers Thursday to consider releasing sex offenders and murderers on furlough after they reach age 50.
People age more quickly in custody than in the general population, said Seth Lipschutz, supervising attorney for the Prisoners’ Rights Office at the Office of the Defender General.
Vermont has 70 male inmates and five female inmates in their 60s, 21 male inmates in their 70s, three male inmates in their 80s, and one man in custody who is older than age 90, according to Department of Corrections data presented to lawmakers Thursday.
Lipschutz believes many older inmates are unlikely to commit another crime. He said the change would save state general fund dollars and provide humane treatment for people who have committed serious crimes.
"They’re in my opinion highly unlikely to reoffend, but we’re punishing them,” Lipschutz said. “I question the social utility of leaving individuals in prison for such long periods of time.”
The suggestion comes as lawmakers are considering the need for a Department of Corrections nursing facility to care for senior prisoners or establishing better relationships with nursing homes for released prisoners.
“I’m trying to figure out why simply because I’m over 65 I’m less dangerous,” said Sen. Peg Flory, 67, a Rutland County Republican.
Other committee members said risk might vary according to each prisoner’s condition.
“If a person’s in a wheelchair, it’s awfully hard to run away,” said Sen. Dick Sears, 72, D-Bennington, who last year introduced a bill that would have granted furlough to nonviolent offenders at age 65 after a minimum sentence. The bill passed the Senate with some changes but did not pass the House of Representatives.
The group of lawmakers, operating as the Joint Legislative Justice Oversight Committee, is expected to make recommendations in January about whether and how Vermont could close a prison in 2017, build a centralized prison facility or continue to reduce the number of prisoners held out-of-state. ..Source.. by April Burbank
August 24, 2015
Convicted molester ordered to pay $1M in civil action
BURLINGTON, Vt. - A former teacher's aide sent to prison for child sex abuse has now been ordered to pay the victim a million dollars.
Douglas Cavett, 49, was convicted in 2010 of sexually assaulting a Burlington middle school student back in the early 1990s. Cavett was sentenced to 5 to 15 years in prison.
The victim sued and on Friday a jury in Burlington awarded him $500,000 in compensatory damages and $500,000 in punitive damages.
Lawyer Jerry O'Neill, who worked the case pro bono, says the verdict is a warning to child molesters that they will be held accountable for their crimes in civil court in addition to facing jail time. ..Source.. by WCAX News
August 9, 2015
Vermont's Successful Sexual Offender Program Is Undergoing Big Changes
8-9-15 Vermont:
There are changes afoot in the way Vermont's Corrections Department houses and treats sexual offenders. The program has most recently been located at facilities in Windsor and Springfield. Now most of it is moving to the Northwest Correctional Center in St. Albans and there's a big turnover in service providers.
Vermont has long been recognized as a leader in sexual offender treatment, with recidivism rates hovering around 5 percent. Now that the program is moving to a new location, none of the independent contractors who have been working with incarcerated offenders have re-applied for their jobs, as required by the Department of Corrections.
The departing therapists do not want to speak publicly about their decisions to leave the program. Several say privately they would be willing to move from the Upper Valley to St. Albans but fear they would not have job security. A few are unhappy with the direction treatment is taking toward what corrections officials call "manualized intervention." Here's how DOC Program Services Director Kim Bushey defines that term:
"'Manualized' means that the curriculum has been developed in a particular order that usually builds on each other. Lessons build on each other, or skills practice build on each other and that there is some structured guidance around how the material gets presented," Bushey explained.
Bushey says she knows some therapists at first resisted the new written curriculum and would rather have more freedom to treat each individual offender differently. But she says it's based on sound research about what triggers sexual misbehavior, and what kinds of interventions are needed to change it. Now that the former therapists have left the program it will be overseen by a newly hired New Hampshire-based contractor called Re-Entry Resources. Bushey acknowledges that the company has more experience in substance abuse treatment than in sexual offender intervention.
"But we also have consultation and they have consultation with experts in the sex offender treatment and assessment world," she said.
Robert Lang, the state's contact for Re-Entry resources, declined to be interviewed. The Department of Corrections provided the $826,000 contract but it does not contain much information about the new the Manchester-New Hampshire based company. The contract covers two years and funds four interventionists.
Bushey says using this single contractor will easier to manage than the separate therapists. She believes Lang will be able to hire replacements for the outgoing therapists who will be able to get positive results by integrating written curriculum into group therapy.
"Now we are preparing for change because we are transitioning the program and we have a new contractor. So we are preparing to shift some of the curriculum around and provide a structured and individual model and a supervision model — but other than that nothing else has really changed," Bushey said.
Nevertheless, one sexual offender treatment specialist who has admired Vermont's program in the past does have concerns about the direction it seems to be taking.
David Prescott is past president of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders, and he has followed the trend away from individual therapy to heavier reliance on manuals. Even though he has used some of that curriculum successfully by revising it, he still can understand why veteran therapists have left Vermont's program.
"Changes such as going to a highly manualized treatment association — it has been responsible for people having second thoughts about staying in the field, and frankly one of them is me. I am very aware that research has shown that who the therapist is is very important to how well treatment actually works," said Prescott.
It's too soon to tell if the new contractor will get the positive recidivism results of the staff who have left. But the legislature's corrections oversight committee says it will keep a close eye on all the changes underway. ..Source.. by Charlotte Albright
May 8, 2015
State senator accused of sexual assault
A Vermont state senator is facing criminal charges of sexual assault, human trafficking and prohibited acts, the Vermont State Police confirmed Thursday night.
Sen. Norman H. McAllister, R-Franklin, is in the midst of his second two-year term as a Republican senator covering most of Franklin County and the town of Alburgh in Grand Isle County. He has been a successful large dairy farmer and active community member.
The Burlington Free Press was first to report that police arrested McAllister, 63, of Highgate on Thursday evening after he spent the day at the Statehouse working on legislative issues, including an education governance debate. State police plainclothes detectives confronted McAllister outside the Statehouse during a break in legislative debate late Thursday afternoon.
He is due to be arraigned at 11 a.m. Friday in Vermont Superior Court in St. Albans.
The allegations include that he either accepted or solicited sex from two women in exchange for overdue rent, officials told the Free Press.
Judge Alison Arms ordered McAllister jailed for lack of $20,000 bail at the Northwest State Correctional Facility in St. Albans Town.
A voice message left at the McAllister home Thursday night was not returned.
A sworn police statement outlining the allegations in more detail would be withheld until after the arraignment Friday, the state police said.
Gov. Peter Shumlin would have no comment Thursday night, spokesman Scott Coriell told the Free Press. Coriell said he thought it was premature to speak. He said it was possible Shumlin might speak once more information was made public at the court arraignment, but there was no guarantee.
Sen. President Pro Tempore John Campbell, D-Windsor, could not be reached for comment. An aide said he also would be unlikely to comment. His seatmate from the Franklin district, Republican Sen. Dustin Degree, declined comment Thursday night but said he might be willing to speak Friday once he learns more information.
McAllister serves on both the Agriculture and Institutions committees in the Senate.
He served as a House member for four two-year terms (2003-10). He was part of a two-seat district covering the towns of Berkshire, Franklin, Highgate and Richford. He served on the House Agriculture Committee while a state representative.
McAllister spoke to his colleagues in the Senate this spring about the death of his wife during the legislative debate over keeping certain safeguards in place for assisted suicide legislation.
The conservative McAllister has proposed some legislation that has raised eyebrows, including his support for a bill requiring those receiving public assistance from Vermont taxpayers to submit to drug testing. The bill would make substance-abuse treatment available to recipients who test positive.
He has served as a director for the Franklin County Farm Bureau; president of the Northwest Holstein Club; director and president for the Missisquoi Amateur Hockey Association; and director of the Highgate Little League.
McAllister also was named Vermont Farm Bureau young farmer of the year in 1981 and Franklin County JC's young farmer of the year in 1982. He is a member of the NRA.
He was born and raised in Windsor and graduated in 1971 from Vermont Technical College in Randolph with an associate degree in agriculture management. He relocated to Franklin County four years later. ..Source.. by Mike Donoghue
April 22, 2015
A Violent Sex Offender Is Released Into the Public Spotlight
See earlier story HERE4-22-15 Vermont:
One week after completing a 23-year prison sentence for a violent sexual assault, Richard Laws walked through downtown Burlington on a sun-drenched afternoon — a "free" man.
Major media outlets had covered his release on April 9, and television crews filmed a state van dropping him off in Vermont's largest city. In anticipation, police in Burlington and Winooski printed up flyers of his mug shot with the accompanying all-caps warning: "NOTIFICATION OF NON-COMPLIANT HIGH RISK SEX OFFENDER." In the ladies' room at Burlington City Hall, the notices were affixed to the backs of every bathroom stall door.
Out on the street, the occasional passerby appeared to recognize the tall and powerfully built 49-year-old. One woman glared at Laws as she walked past, and glanced back twice before ducking into a store.
Inside the Burlington Housing Authority headquarters on lower Main Street, Laws seemed to find a sympathetic ear. "I was released from prison 23 years ago ... I mean, I was just released," he stammered nervously to the female receptionist. Laws explained that he had been staying with friends in Barre since he got out of prison, but, fearing that his hosts would encounter backlash, he didn't think he should stay there for long.
"I'm trying to see if there's any programs I'm eligible for," he said.
In fact, the receptionist said, the housing agency has someone specifically tasked with helping recently released inmates. "Why were you incarcerated?" she asked.
"Aggravated assault ... rape and kidnapping," Laws answered.
She told him he could return the next day to set up an appointment. "Bring your Social Security card," she told him. She had one more question.
Are you on the sex offender registry?" she asked. He nodded yes.
"Are you on the 10-year registry or the lifetime?" she asked.
"The lifetime," he said.
"Then we can't assist you, unfortunately," she answered abruptly. "If you were on the 10-year, we could."
"OK," Laws said quietly. "OK ... OK." He shuffled outside and headed up Main Street with no specific destination in mind.
There are 1,361 registered sex offenders in Vermont, and almost all of them were released from custody without fanfare or public notice. Many are required to be on the public sex-offender registry for 10 years. More serious offenders, such as Laws, are on it for life.
"I took a plea ... to put this behind me," Laws said on Church Street. "The registry didn't even exist then. It wasn't part of the deal. It's a second, third punishment. They say it's about public safety," he said, predicting he would likely end up homeless. "How does that help public safety?"
Since 2009, when the Vermont Department of Corrections drafted new rules, the release of every high-risk offender who skipped sex-offender treatment has been publicly announced. Laws is one of a handful to trigger a statewide media blitz.
Such offenders do not qualify for parole or early release: They serve every day of their maximum sentence. Once they're free, they don't get probation supervision. They are only required to provide their address and comply with registry rules.
The DOC says such notifications help keep the public safe from people over whom they have little control. Critics say the public and media attention make it all but impossible for those offenders to successfully reenter society.
"They make people homeless; that's often the endgame," Vermont prisoner's rights attorney Seth Lipschutz said. "In every era in humanity, there's somebody that the public loves to hate. It's been Jews, Catholics, African Americans ... when I was a kid it was communists and homosexuals. Now, in our politically correct society, there is no one we can hate except for terrorists and sex offenders."
Complicating this particular case, Laws says he should never have been labeled as "non-compliant, high risk." He insists that he tried to get into sex-offender treatment for years but was rejected, and supplied court and DOC documents to Seven Days to support his claims. He even filed a lawsuit — later dismissed on a technicality — that sought admittance to treatment programs.
Records also show that Laws had completed the two-day assessment to get into treatment, while DOC officials told the parole board that he had refused. A lawyer from the Vermont Attorney General's Office acknowledged the error in a 2008 letter, which stated Laws was "eligible to participate in rehabilitative programming." But Laws maintains the DOC still wouldn't treat him.
"This is a shell game," Laws said. "They say I refused to do my assessment. They wanted it in writing that I refused to program. I would not."
In an email, Commissioner of Corrections Andy Pallito declined to discuss Laws' treatment status, citing federal privacy laws. "I can say that Mr. Laws was given the same access to our programs as all people within our custody are given," Pallito wrote. "Each program that we run, however, has certain requirements that an individual has to adhere to for successful participation and completion. I will say that the overwhelming majority of people participate and complete these programs during their custody with the DOC."
The program, which takes several months to complete, involves both group and one-on-one counseling designed to prevent subjects from reoffending. Had Laws been treated, he might have been released early on parole and avoided public notification.
Laws also said that the DOC offered him early release if he'd abandon his initial plan to move to Washington County. "I hope you understand the publicity that will surround your scheduled release," DOC official Darryl Graham wrote to Laws in June 2013. "Just a thought, have you considered relocating in another county in Vermont or possibly to another state?"
DOC records portray Laws as having a troubled life: abused as a child growing up in Chittenden County towns, placed in foster care, later convicted of crimes including DUI, marijuana possession and simple assault. Although he held jobs sporadically as a dishwasher and builder, he also had problems related to alcohol.
Authorities paint a grisly picture of what happened on a June night in 1992. Laws, then 27, came on to a woman inside the Mad Mountain Tavern in Waitsfield, but she rebuffed his advances. Later that night, he punctured her tires. When she tried to drive home, she was forced to pull over down the road from the tavern. Laws, who had followed her, offered to help. He then raped her in his car and beat her with a tire iron, fracturing her skull to the point of near death.
In a plea agreement, Laws was sentenced to what amounted to 23 years. He served every day of all 23, the DOC says, because he refused to undergo sex-offender treatment.
Now on the outside, Laws faces multiple restrictions. To keep him from contacting the victim, who lives in the Mad River Valley, the towns of Warren, Waitsfield and Fayston obtained court orders barring Laws from crossing their borders.
Nearly a dozen businesses in downtown Barre, including bars, a candy store and a jewelry store, have taken out no-trespass orders against Laws. If he enters any of those establishments, he could be arrested.
Laws initially hoped to take the bus from Barre to Burlington to access treatment providers and social services. But a few days after his release, University of Vermont officials took out a no-trespass order banning him from campus, where the bus makes a stop.
Last week in an Addison County court, his former girlfriend and adult daughter took out restraining orders against him. His victim, too, has been in the news. In Waitsfield, Sue Russell spoke out at a community forum organized to support her. "I know the community has my back and has my family's back," she told WCAX-TV in a news report that blacked out her face. Even after 23 years, she said, she still looks over her shoulder. (Seven Days does not usually identify sexual assault victims, but Russell has allowed other news outlets to use her name.)
Back in Burlington, Police Chief Michael Schirling urged "general vigilance, not hyper-vigilance" in an email. "There are, unfortunately, many violent offenders in our communities. Some have served their time. Others have yet to be identified or caught ... Mindfulness about personal and community safety is the most important tool."
In addition to public scrutiny and no-trespass orders, Laws faces more mundane challenges related to being incarcerated since 1992.
Laws bought a cellphone with money left over from his prison account, but he had no idea how to use it. When a reporter had lunch with him at Panera, he wondered if the notification buzzer was a tracking device. Walking through downtown Burlington made him thirsty. In front of the Rite Aid, he pondered aloud, "You think they have drinks in there?" He was wondering if he could buy an RC Cola, a brand that was prevalent on grocery store shelves decades ago.
For now, Laws is living with friends in a dilapidated house not far from downtown Barre. The place is so grimy that Laws bought a $20 tent and pitched it in the spare bedroom. Inside the tent is an air mattress, a chest where he stores his legal papers, a lamp, a tin of biscotti and a half-empty jar of Nutella.
While in Barre, Laws says, he's homebound, fearful that someone will file a police report accusing him of wrongdoing. Laws said prison taught him to aggressively defend himself, which could get him in trouble on the outside. "If I feel threatened, I swing first," he said. "In prison, there's nowhere to run, there are no cops to call. It's an instinct I am trying to turn off. That's not going to work for me in public."
Laws occasionally takes day trips with his girlfriend, whom he met through a prison pen pal program. She lives in Winooski and needs oxygen because of a health problem. Two weekends ago, while driving in Franklin County, she fell ill, according to Laws, so he took the wheel. Someone had already called the police about the erratic driving on Route 105 in Sheldon. The cops stopped the car and charged Laws with driving with a suspended license. That case is pending.
Laws says he wants to get a job and an apartment in Burlington, where he can get help. A few days a week, his girlfriend drives him there so he can pick up his mail at the post office and meet with social service agencies, including the Champlain Valley Office of Economic Opportunity and the Howard Center.
There have been other acts of kindness, too, Laws said. He figured the police would be his "worst enemy," but said they've been exceedingly polite and helpful — they even set up the voicemail on his phone.
A few days after his release, Laws decided to get a haircut. He came upon a barbershop and was surprised to find a woman working alone inside. He didn't want to scare her, he said, nor did he want her to accuse him of doing anything wrong.
The barber later told Seven Days that she recognized Laws from media coverage. Her heart started racing, she recalled, but she cut his hair anyway, and they talked. He told her he'd been in prison. When another customer finally walked in, she said she felt a lot better. ..Source.. by Mark Davis
April 21, 2015
Richard Law challenges Corrections department claims
See earlier stories HERE and HERE4-21-15 Vermont:
BARRE — Richard Laws, the sex offender recently released from prison after serving his sentence, disputes the Department of Corrections’ claims that he refused treatment, claiming that the Department instead wouldn’t allow him to participate in treatment, including during his 10-year relocation to a prison in Kentucky.
Laws spent about 23 years behind bars for kidnapping, raping and beating a woman in the early 1990s. According to court records, Laws pleaded guilty in 1993 to kidnapping, aggravated sexual assault and aggravated assault. He was sentenced to serve 25 to 30 years.
He was released earlier this month, but before he was freed police conducted a public information campaign to educate people about him, including his alleged refusal to seek treatment and his being deemed a high risk to re-offend. Police distributed flyers with Laws’ picture and some of his criminal history to local businesses.
In an interview Monday, Laws said the Department has misled the public regarding his efforts to get treatment.
“That’s just not the truth,” he said. “The truth is they left me out of state until I was seven months from maxing out and they wouldn’t let me program out of state. They just left me out there. By the time they brought me back there wasn’t even any time to program.”
Laws was eligible for release on his minimum date back in April 2005, but because he had not had treatment, he spent 10 more years behind bars.
“You’d have to be pretty foolish to believe that I would choose to spend an extra 10 years in prison because I didn’t want to do some 18-month program,” Laws said. “There’s nothing I wouldn’t have done to avoid spending an extra 10 years in prison. Think about it, I’m 49 years old, I would have been out when I was 38. How could you even consider that to be plausible?”
In an effort to reduce overcrowding in its prisons, Vermont sends some of its inmates to Kentucky and Arizona under a contract with the private, for-profit Corrections Corporation of America. The Department had no comment about Laws for this story, saying he is no longer under their supervision. However, Commissioner Andrew Pallito said Monday that Vermont inmates housed in other states who need treatment for substance abuse or sex offender treatment are brought back to Vermont to get that treatment in time before the inmates complete their sentences.
Laws has sued the state multiple times for treatment-related reasons. In one case, Judge Helen Toor dismissed a suit in 2009 in which Laws claimed the Department of Corrections gave the parole board inaccurate information about his willingness to get an assessment that would get the ball rolling for treatment.
According to court records, the Department told the board in 2007 that Laws had refused to take the assessment twice. However, by the state’s own admission, it neglected to tell the board that Laws had indeed done the assessment at a later date. Court records show Laws had declined the assessment at first because he had appealed his case and didn’t want to disclose information that could hurt that appeal. Once that case was finalized, Laws took the assessment.
After the state made that admission, Toor dismissed the case because the state had rectified the error. The state noted that the parole board denied Laws parole because of major violations he committed while behind bars, not because of what it had said to the board about Laws. Court records did not go into detail about what those violations were.
Since his release from prison, Laws said, he has been overwhelmed by all the attention focused on him. Most of the media attention directed at Laws has focused on the fact that Laws is an “untreated” sex offender and therefore presents a bigger risk to the community than a sex offender who has undergone treatment.
“Corrections is sounding the alarm for a situation they completely created themselves,” he said, adding he was absolutely willing to participate in treatment programming.
Laws is currently spending nights in Barre and traveling to Burlington during the day to look for work and get mental health treatment. Because of the heightened attention on him, he says he avoids downtown Barre because people recognize him from fliers that were posted just prior to his release from jail and yell at him.
Laws said seven businesses have issued no-trespass orders against him. He also says he can no longer take the bus to Burlington because it stops at the University of Vermont, which also has a no-trespass order against him.
“You couldn’t do more to alienate me from the community than you’ve done,” Laws said. ..Source.. by Eric Blaisdell
April 14, 2015
Convicted sex offender pleads not guilty to DLS charge
See earlier post. And 4-15 UPDATE: Restraining order imposed on sex offender and Laws’ release reignites concern about state sex offender statutes, registry4-14-15 Vermont:
ST. ALBANS, Vt. - He's been a free man for less than one week. But Monday, convicted rapist, Richard Laws, found himself back in front of a judge.
Laws was arrested over the weekend for driving with a suspended license. He claims it was a matter of safety.
Richard Laws, 49, is still adjusting to life on the outside. The convicted sex offender has spent the last 23 years locked up for the brutal rape of a Waitsfield woman. But his first few days of freedom have not gone smoothly.
Reporter Jennifer Costa: Do you feel that public safety officials are trying to find a reason to get you back in prison?
Laws: Oh, absolutely.
Saturday he was arrested for driving with a suspended license. Monday, he went before the judge.
Laws admits he was behind the wheel on Route 105, but claims it was an emergency. He tells WCAX he started driving only after his girlfriend became woozy from migraine medication and drove off the road. Laws says he informed the Department of Corrections of the situation, but was stopped by State Police in Sheldon minutes after hopping in the driver's seat.
"I felt that it was the lesser of two evils. Our safety was in jeopardy with her driving. It was wrong and I went in there and tried to admit it was wrong," said Laws.
Laws knew his license was suspended for a 1991 DUI, but thought it was a civil, not criminal suspension. He says he wanted to plead guilty in exchange for a suspended sentence or a fine. But when prosecutors mentioned the possibility of jail time, he entered an official plea of not guilty.
"If I can't live free out here, I'd rather be dead. I don't want to go back to prison," said Laws.
Costa: Would a DLS be a big deal for anyone else other than him?
Jim Hughes, Franklin County Prosecutor: No.
Hughes says DLS cases are typically punishable by a fine, but a judge can consider an offender's criminal record. Hughes is concerned about how quickly Laws reoffended.
"He's had a very long time to make sure that he conforms his conduct to the laws of the state of Vermont and very shortly after he's released, he's violating the laws," said Hughes.
Hughes did not want to make a deal without corrections weighing in on whether Laws needs to be re-incarcerated, supervised or fined.
"Is this the danger everyone anticipated out of me? I mean come on man," said Laws.
"If I'm Jack the Ripper and I'm supposedly the most dangerous man around, is me driving with a suspended license what's scaring you," said Laws.
Laws opted to represent himself saying he didn't want taxpayers shelling out cash for his public defender. But says he doesn't trust Corrections and claims the DOC mislead the public about his unwillingness to participate in sex offender treatment.
Costa: Are you going to stay out of trouble?
Laws: Yeah, I'm not going to harm anyone. I just want to live my life. I'm overwhelmed by this entire situation.
For now, Laws is free on the condition he doesn't drive. He's due back in court next month.
DLS can carry a prison sentence of two years. We checked with DOC. No one is currently serving jail time for driving with a suspended license. As for Laws' victim, Sue Russell, she continues to be an advocate for victims of sexual violence.
She has a 10 year restraining order prohibiting Laws from entering the Mad River Valley. ..Source.. by WCAX News
April 11, 2015
Tracking non-compliant sex offender tricky
See back story: High-risk sex offender released in Burlington, homeless and Police: Richard Laws released into Burlington4-10-15 Vermont:
UPDATE 4-11/12/14: Convicted sex offender, Richard Laws, re-arrested (Cited for driving on suspended license) and Convicted sex offender Richard Laws rearrested, released again 4-12: ACLU: Posters weaken Laws’ reintegration chances and 4-14: Family: Protect us from Richard Laws
Laws refused treatment that would have reprogrammed sex behavior
WATERBURY, Vt. —The whereabouts of Richard Laws, the untreated, homeless sex offender are being monitored closely. He's said to have visited Burlington, Barre and possibly Winooski since he was released.
"The more often we can receive updates the more accurate the information is," said Jeffrey Wallin, the director of the Vermont Crime Information Center.
Laws, labeled "high risk" and deemed "non-compliant" on Vermont's Sex Offender Registry, refused rehabilitative treatment in prison.
Tom Powell is a psychologist and the former clinical director for the state's Department of Corrections. He says the treatment available to sex offenders serving time is invasive, but virtually reprograms their behavior around sexuality.
"You can come out of one of those groups pretty beat up if you've gone in and not made an effort," Powell said.
Laws served his maximum sentence, but could have served less time if he participated in the therapeutic programming. His refusal to do so is a major factor of his high risk title.
But Powell said the likelihood Laws will re-offend is not much greater than someone who did get treatment.
"Sexual recidivism is actually a low rate re-offense. The average is about 15 percent across all populations treated and untreated, and people who have actually gone through treatment recidivated at a 5 percent or less rate over a follow-up period," Powell said.
Highly emotional cases like the kidnapping, sexual assault and death of Brooke Bennett, carried out by Michael Jacques in 2008, are part of the reason Powell said the state is extra cautious about sex offender reform.
"The hesitancy to take chances, and the desire for surety comes directly from the trauma that case imposed on Vermont's psyche," Powell said.
In actuality, Laws is one of almost 20 homeless sex offenders the registry said are currently living in the state.
"It is a fair amount of work for the registry to stay on top of those individuals and gather that information but we do it everyday, every business day and make sure that the covering agency has all the information the covering agency needs particularly if the individual doesn't check in," Powell said. ..Source.. by Hannah McDonald
March 17, 2015
Rutland Volunteers Help Sex Offender Re-Enter Community
A restorative justice program is showing remarkable success in helping high-risk offenders re-enter the community after prison. The idea is to create a circle of support and accountability, or CoSA, to help former inmates avoid re-offending.
The concept originated in Canada in the 1990s and Vermont is one of a handful of states now using the program. Three Canadian studies have shown it to reduce recidivism among sex offenders by as much as 70 percent.
A team of CoSA volunteers in Rutland and the offender they’ve been helping spoke with VPR about the program and why they think it works.
Tall and 40-something, the man asked that we distort his voice and not include his name in the story. “I sexually offended minors. It started many, many years ago,” he said. “I was inside for eight years.”
The man doesn’t make excuses for what he did and he understands his crime makes people angry and fearful. Ironically, he said prison is where he finally got treatment, first with the state’s program for sexual abusers and later with CoSA. He was released from prison more than two years ago.
“I got out in October, 2012,” and it was overwhelming,” he said. “I have to admit I was actually quite scared at that time. I remember thinking what am I doing? I had learned to be comfortable where I was and I definitely felt safe where I was.”
When asked if he was worried he’d re-offend, he nods. “Yes, I was worried that I’d re-offend. I always knew that I was capable of re-offending if I didn’t manage my situations correctly. But,” he said, “I knew that if I used the tools that I had learned I could manage it and luckily the people that were around me, CoSA for sure, helped me to make sure I did utilize that and did not reoffend.”
The man’s CoSA team is made up of a probation officer from the Department of Corrections, a program facilitator and four volunteers. The group began meeting once a week in 2012, while the man was still in prison. Now after nearly two-and-a-half years, they meet every other Thursday for about an hour.
“It is labor intensive,” admits Leslie Briere. She’s a corrections program supervisor and CoSA team member who works with parolees in Rutland and Middlebury. “I don’t think anyone benefits from someone being incarcerated long-term,” said Briere. “But the fact is at some point most offenders are going to come back to the community. So anything we can do to build their skills and to give them some opportunities and resources to make them successful everyone is better for that,” adds Briere.
On this Thursday, volunteers take a few minutes to catch up with one another before program facilitator Shawn McMore brings the meeting to order. “So let’s check in with everyone since the last CoSA,” he says, “find out what’s been going on. Joan, how have things been going for you?”
The meetings provide offenders and team members with a chance to visit and talk over any problems or issues they’re having.
When offenders first get out of prison, many of their problems have to do with finding work and a place to live. But over time, the issues become more nuanced.
For instance, at this meeting, the released offender talks about how frustrated and angry he got the week before when a department of corrections official told him he couldn’t put a security camera on his home.
The group knows that he’s received threats from his neighbors, which is why he wanted the camera. Volunteer Sherri Durgin-Campbell acknowledges his fear but gently pushes for more. “So I have a question - did you reach out to anyone in CoSA?"
Like an alcoholic who seeks help from a mentor, offenders taking part in CoSA are encouraged to call members of their team when they get upset to ensure problems get talked through and dangerous or unhealthy habits get broken.
Sitting in a gray hoodie, the man admits he didn’t pick up the phone right away, but instead tried to work through his emotions on his own. “I tried to think it through, you know, what set me off, what made me angry?" he says. "And I was able to fall back on some of the things I learned in the program inside."
Shawn McMore, the program coordinator, likes what he hears. “I was impressed because of the fact that you’ve learned so much since you’ve come out. You didn’t blow up,” says McMore. “You knew what was happening you identified it and said look I can’t go any further, and you just cut it off there.”
Volunteer Sherri Durgin-Campbell reminds the man that while his reaction is normal, his situation is not. “You have conditions,” she points out. "That is a reality I think that we need to look at that because the longer you’re out the more normal you’re feeling. But you have something in your past that’s an aspect of you and you’re going to have to deal with it just like anybody with any other addiction has to deal with,” she says while the man nods.
Durgin-Campbell, says she’s proud of how far the man has come in the nearly three years she’s known him. But she says she didn’t join the program for him. “I didn’t join CoSA to be nice. My main reason for getting involved was I wanted to protect the community,” she says matter-of-factly.
Durgin-Campbell says one of her own children was incarcerated and she says that experience was an eye opener. “When someone comes out of a period of incarceration there are enormous challenges that I don’t think the public understands,” she says. “Because people don’t want to rent to you, they don’t want to give you a job and there are conditions placed on you that make it very difficult to make friends. So it’s a little bit for some of these folks like being released from the bars, but having invisible bars placed on them that puts them in solitary. And that,” she says, “is very dangerous to the community because that’s going to allow them to go back to the kinds of behaviors that they engaged in before.”
While the CoSA team provides direction, support and advice, team member Joan Eckley says they also help with more mundane issues like figuring out a budget and grocery shopping. “We drove him to and from his worksite, because initially when he first got the job he was stuck in a place that had no public transportation and he needed to get to the next town. So between his family and the CoSA volunteers we drove everywhere he needed to go,” says Eckley. “So it was very basic needs and fortunately he knew how to cook. A lot of people don’t know how to cook.”
The group also gets together socially says Leslie Briere, going out to dinner or to a movie. “It helps because a lot of offenders become isolated - particularly people who have sex offense.”
Sheri Durgin-Campbell nods. “Sometimes what somebody needs more than anything else is a friend.”
But while CoSA teams provide plenty of support they also stress accountability.
Offenders can be manipulative so volunteer Elizabeth Bellany says teams work together to avoid being conned or lied to. “In a CoSA there are no secrets,” she says. “So if the core member reaches out to one of the volunteers outside the CoSA meeting we must discuss this with everyone in the team. This is one way we can stop an offender from manipulating us or prevent them from becoming closer to one of the group and splitting the group.”
Not every offender leaving prison qualifies for CoSA. Rutland’s Program Coordinator Shawn McMore says men and women who want to take part have to want to change and not every offender does. This year, of the eight offenders referred for the Rutland program, McMore says only three were accepted.
And he says finding people in the community willing to take part is a challenge. “It’s not just anybody that comes through our door that’s going to be a volunteer.”
CoSA volunteers go through about six hours of specialized training, he says, in addition to getting ongoing support.
Yearly administration costs run about $12,500 per team. Shawn McMore says that’s a bargain compared to the roughly $50,000 the state spends to incarcerate someone for a year.
McMore says CoSA programs are being run in 12 locations across Vermont with 25 to 30 going on at any one time.
According to a 2013 study that assessed 21 completed CoSAs in Vermont, only one of the 21 participating offenders was charged with a new crime. Among Vermont offenders not taking part in the program, Shawn McMore says nearly half will violate conditions of their release or break the law again. “Other states are taking the CoSA model from what Vermont has done because they see it is worthwhile. But like I said, you have to vet the core member, that they want it. Then you have to have the right volunteers and make sure it’s a team,” he adds.
McMore believes the program not only protects communities, but helps keep offenders who want to change from ending up back in prison. The man at the center of this CoSA agrees.
“I can’t imagine what it would have been like had I got out originally and not had it,” the man says. “I definitely know that it’s surely helped me from re-offending and I think it would anybody else.”
The man has recently bought a house and admits his neighbors who know about his past, are not happy about it. “I understand the fear that comes with a person who’s committed a sex offense,” he says quietly. “I just want to be able to live my life.”
That will never be easy, he admits. The stigma of his crime will always follow him. But he says thanks to a group of strangers who he now calls friends, there are people he trusts who have his back. That’s a new experience to him, he says, and one he doesn’t want to lose. ..Source.. by VPR News
February 26, 2015
Governor signs sex offender bill into law
Gov. Peter Shumlin signed into law a bill to tighten restrictions on sex offenders getting out of prison Wednesday
Shumlin thanked House and Senate lawmakers for their work on the bill, which was among the first to be signed this session.
H.16 updates current policy for the sex offender registry to require any offender who is maxing out their sentence, meaning they have not undergone any treatment, to submit the address where they intend to reside
Under the previous law, the offender has three days before they are legally required to check in with the registry. “This leaves a victim and the victim’s community, workplace and others in fear,” Rep. Maxine Grad, D-Moretown, chair of the House Judiciary Committee and the bill’s lead sponsor.
Grad and her fellow lawmakers ushered the bill through the Legislature in part to serve the case of one of her constituents, who was kidnapped and raped in 1992.
Since the attack, Sue Russell has been an advocate for survivors, testifying in Montpelier and Washington, D.C., about victims’ rights.
Russell’s attacker will be released from prison later this year, having maxed out his sentence. In advance of his release, Russell has secured a restraining order prohibiting him from entering the towns around where Russell lives.
The new law will help Vermonters prepare when a violent sex offender is being released from prison, she said.
“It’s not just impacting the victim, but the community as well,” Russell said. “It’s a ripple effect.” ..Source.. by Elizabeth Hewitt
February 4, 2015
House takes up bill on ‘revenge porn’
A new bill in the House takes aim at so-called “revenge porn.”
Introduced to the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, H.105 would make illegal the disclosure of sexually explicit images of a person without the subject’s consent.
The practice, a hot issue on the national stage, is termed “revenge porn” because it often involves jilted lovers posting images on websites as a way to get back at an ex.
Rep. Kesha Ram, D-Burlington, one of the bill’s sponsors, introduced the legislation Tuesday. Similar legislation has been introduced in Vermont in the past but the bills have failed because revenge porn wasn’t perceived to be a big issue for Vermonters.
“I’m here to tell you that I feel that this bill will affect many lives in Vermont,” Ram told the committee.
Ram took up the issue after being approached by several women who had photographs of themselves posted online without their consent. Aside from photos, the posts also included personal information such as phone numbers and home addresses.
One of the difficulties in drafting legislation is that often the photograph is taken consensually or is a self-taken photo. The problem lies with who is responsible for sharing the material, Ram said.
“That may go viral,” she said. “It may become completely out of your control and out of your hands, shared thousands of times over on the Internet, perhaps as though someone thought it was consensual pornography.”
H.105 builds on an existing statute on voyeurism. The bill would prohibit the dissemination of a photograph or video of a subject in stages of undress or engaged in sexual activity without the subject’s permission.
The bill also extends penalties to images that are digitally altered to make someone appear to be engaging in sexual conduct — using Photoshop or other software programs to put someone’s head onto a different body, for instance.
Ram cited “vitriolic websites” that serve as hubs where people post nude photos, often of ex-lovers. Though many websites are run from the United States, they are often hosted internationally to avoid penalties.
Some websites, she said, are organized geographically by state, so there are pages dedicated to showing photographs of women in Vermont.
California was the first state to make revenge porn illegal in 2013. Since then, 12 more states have adopted similar legislation.
On Monday, Kevin Bollaert became the first person convicted under California’s law. He was allegedly behind two websites, one of which required posters to include victims’ personal contact information and links to their pages on social media.
The bill is in early stages now, and is likely to undergo changes as the committee takes testimony over the coming weeks. Ram said Vermont has the opportunity to learn from other states’ experiences in drafting its legislation, avoiding, for instance, a loophole in the California law that excluded selfies.
In the initial discussion of the bill, legislators were concerned that the bill was too broad.
“Can it apply to a fairly innocent behavior?” asked Willem Jewett, D-Ripton. “Art, perhaps?”
Revenge porn laws often run into difficulties because of First Amendment concerns. Michele Childs of legislative council, who drafted the bill, acknowledged flaws in the draft and encouraged committee members to ask questions of witnesses scheduled to testify this week.
When it comes to creating regulations about the Internet, legislation is often chasing after technology.
“This is an emerging area of law,” Childs said. “We realize this has the potential to step on protected speech issues.” ..Source.. by Elizabeth Hewitt
February 3, 2015
Bill tightens restrictions on sex offenders released from prison
The Vermont House last week passed a bill tightening restrictions on how long sex offenders who have maxed out their sentences have to report to the state’s registry after being released from prison.
By a unanimous vote Thursday, the House approved H.16, requiring convicted sex offenders to report information about where they intend to live to the Department of Public Safety before their release.
As the law stands, a sex offender who is completing his or her maximum sentence has three days to report to the registry after they leave the correctional facility.
“Those can be three very long days for a community,” said Rep. Maxine Grad, D-Moretown, who sponsored the bill.
All sex offenders are required to tell the state where they plan to reside within three days of their release from prison. The deadline has served as a catchall for offenders since the registry was established in 1996.
Grad said the bill responds to concerns that victims would not have any notice that their attacker may have returned to their community until three days after they arrived. With this new regulation, the public will have some warning before a sex offender comes to their area.
“I do hope this law will provide some level of support to our communities and victims,” Grad said.
The Sex Offender Registry has come under fire in recent years for inconsistencies and inaccuracies. An audit in 2010 found that several people were erroneously listed on the registry, while some offenders were left off it. A 2014 audit found that those discrepancies continued.
A bill being reviewed by the Senate Judiciary Committee attempts to tackle some of the ongoing issues with the registry, such as inconsistencies in registration requirements for offenders and establishing a system for removing a name that has been placed in error.
H.16, which will come before Senate Judiciary this week, is a more targeted attempt to patch a hole in the sex offender registry system.
In 2009, Vermont adopted indeterminate sentencing, which encourages offenders to participate in rehabilitative programs to shorten their time in prison. Once they are released, they remain under some form of supervision.
The bill will impact only about two dozen offenders in Vermont who refused treatment and served their full sentence. However the Vermont Network Against Domestic and Sexual Violence considers that group to be very important.
“We have concerns over offenders who have refused treatment and maxed out,” said Auburn Watersong, the associate director of public policy at the network. “It can be some of the most dangerous cases.”
Offenders who serve the maximum sentence generally have chosen not to participate in counseling or other services while in prison. While some offenders may opt for an earlier release date with parole, those who serve a maximum sentence have no supervision other than being included on the registry.
“We feel like it’s much better protection for victims and communities as a whole,” Watersong said. ..Source.. by Elizabeth Hewitt
January 25, 2015
Lawmakers ask: How good does sex registry need to be?
MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — Vermont lawmakers are grappling with how close to perfect the state's sex offender registry needs to be before offenders' addresses are posted online.
Vermont in 2009 passed a law saying the registry had to have a clean audit from the state auditor of accounts before addresses could be posted. A 2010 audit found many errors; a follow-up audit last July found what Auditor of Accounts Doug Hoffer labeled "critical errors" in 11 percent of cases.
The July report found eight cases in which offenders had been released from incarceration, but had not had their names added to the online registry. In two cases, the offender did not meet the criteria for registration, but had information posted anyway. In one case, the registered offender was dead. Thirty-four cases mislabeled the length of time a person was supposed to remain on the registry, which is 10 years for some crimes and lifetime registration for others, Hoffer's office reported.
Sen. Richard Sears, D-Bennington, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Friday the standard should be a 0 percent error rate on information as basic as whether someone should or should not be on the online registry.
At a Judiciary Committee meeting Jan. 8, Sears appeared more flexible.
Committee members and witnesses, including Public Safety Commissioner Keith Flynn, said it was unfortunate that the 2009 law did not define what a clean audit meant in terms of an acceptable error rate.
"You can't keep waiting for a positive audit, without defining what a positive audit is. If we were to define (the error rate), it would probably be 10 percent," Sears said, according to a recording of the session.
Defender General Matthew Valerio interjected, "Or 5, or 2."
Sears added, "Or 5 or 2 or 1 (percent)."
Sears said the most important thing to get right was whether someone should be on the registry at all. "If you're supposed to be on it, you should be on it. If you're not supposed to be on it, you shouldn't be," he said.
With Hoffer's finding that in two cases, even that information was wrong, Sears acknowledged that perfection would be difficult to attain. "Human beings enter the information" into a Department of Public Safety database, he said.
The issue makes civil libertarians nervous.
"You should have the registry accurate before you start adding addresses because when you add addresses you've created a target for vigilantes," said Allen Gilbert, executive director of the Vermont chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.
Two Maine sex offenders were fatally shot in 2006 after information about them was posted online. Authorities said the gunman, Stephen A. Marshall, 20, of Nova Scotia, fatally shot himself when police confronted him on a bus in Boston.
Valerio told The Associated Press he doesn't like the idea of adding addresses at all. People with criminal convictions in their background tend to move frequently. A new person moving into an apartment or home vacated by someone on the registry could be targeted, he said.
But Sears said he did not want to reopen what he considers a settled issue, adding that he supports posting of sex offenders' addresses. ..Source.. by Dave Gram
January 13, 2015
Senate committee works to fine tune sex offender registry bill
State senators Tuesday began work on a bill intended to resolve persistent problems with the state’s sex offender registry.
The bill, S.13, is designed to fix problems with the registry that have been known for years and were highlighted this summer in a Seven Days article.
A 2010 state audit found numerous problems with the registry, including people missing who should be registered and vice versa. A new audit released in 2014 found that those errors persisted.
One employee at the Public Safety Department, which administers the registry, is faced with deciding who should be on the public registry, said Keith Flynn, the public safety commissioner.
Those decisions lie with the court, whereas the public safety department should only administer the database, he said. The decision on whether someone should be on the registry should be handed to the Public Safety Department by the court at the time of sentencing, he said.
The public safety department also wants to eliminate inconsistencies in registration requirements for offenders.
“We want to get this right,” Flynn said.
Testimony in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday centered around how people who committed crimes in other states should be listed on the registry. About 85 percent of people on the registry are Vermonters who live in Vermont and the rest are people with out-of-state or federal convictions, Flynn said.
The bill is still in early stages and will likely change. ..Source.. by Laura Krantz is VTDigger's criminal justice and corrections reporter.
December 2, 2014
Courts ask for clarity in sex offender information collecting
And the finger pointing begins..12-2-2014 Vermont:
Language in state law leaves room for unclear interpretation
MONTPELIER, Vt. —Monday, Vermont’s Joint Legislative Corrections Oversight Committee heard from representatives from the court system who are looking at the communication breakdowns that have led to inaccurate and missing information on the sex offender registry.
One of the major issues on Monday’s agenda was homing in on who exactly is in charge of collecting sex offender information before it hits the registry.
Currently, state law says it's up to the court to get the information from offenders, but according to Chief Administrative Judge Amy Davenport, language in the law needs to be changed to specific responsibilities for specific departments.
“We need to find the best way to tweak the statute a little bit so it's clear who's responsible for doing what and the court clerk isn't responsible for sending fingerprints, when the court clerk doesn't get the fingerprints from law enforcement,” said Judge Amy Davenport.
Vermont Sen. Dick Sears, who sits on the Corrections Oversight Committee said "Today was fairly encouraging that the court, the corrections department, and the Department of Public Safety are working together to provide us with some recommendations and I plan to take that up as soon as the Legislature convenes in January.” ..Source.. by Jarred Hill
November 30, 2014
Vermont court officials to discuss sex registry
MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — Top Vermont court officials are set to talk with lawmakers about how to reduce the number of errors on the state's sex offender registry.
The Legislature's Joint Corrections Oversight Committee will hear Monday from Chief Administrative Judge Amy Davenport and Court Administrator Patricia Gabel.
At a meeting on Nov. 17, Public Safety Commissioner Keith Flynn urged the panel to push for information to be supplied to judges so they can more easily decide at the time of sentencing whether someone belongs on the registry and for how long.
Legislation passed in 2009 directed Flynn's department not to post the addresses of offenders online until it got a clean review from the state auditor's office. Two audits since then have found persistent problems. ..Source.. by sfgate.com
November 17, 2014
Officials Still Fixing Vermont Sex-Offender Registry
See also: VT Lawmakers Propose Changes to Sex Offender Registry11-17-2014 Vermont:
Law enforcement officials say they are still struggling to fix Vermont’s faulty sex-offender registry, which for years has been riddled with missing and inaccurate information.
Testifying before the Joint Corrections Oversight Committee, Public Safety Commissioner Keith Flynn said his agency has made progress since a summer audit discovered a litany of errors with the state’s inventory of 1,200 sex criminals, including omitted offenders, people inaccurately included on the list and offenders incorrectly identified.
But Flynn made clear that any potential fixes for the problems, documented in July in Seven Days, are still in the proposal phase. One key suggestion that Flynn offered lawmakers is to have judges make a binding decision, upon sentencing, whether or not a defendant should go on the registry, and if so for how long.
Currently, staffers in the Department of Public Safety, who are not trained lawyers, are making that call. But it’s not a straightforward decision. Vermont’s sex-offender law is more than 30 pages long and includes numerous exemptions.
Many of the errors in the registry have been traced back to faulty decisions by Department of Public Safety employees.
“Our job at public safety is administrative. It’s not interpretative,” Flynn said. “When it becomes interpretative, there are problems. It’s something that should be coming from the bench and shouldn’t be left to an administrative or clerical person in the Department of Public Safety.”
Vermont maintains two registries — one privately held by law enforcement, the other accessible to the public — detailing the location and identity of qualifying sex criminals.
The private registry is more comprehensive; defendants convicted of lesser crimes and defendants younger than 18 years old cannot be included on the public registry.
Earlier this year, the registries flunked their second straight state audit.
The findings were similar to a 2010 audit, which inspired a working group of officials from several agencies to convene to fix the problems. But the group met only twice, kept no minutes and disbanded in 2011. Between the 2010 and 2014 audits, the state spent $400,000 to implement a database that officials said would help fix the problem.
“To have two audits basically say, 'You didn't get it right' — it's a kick in the ass,” State Auditor Doug Hoffer told Seven Days earlier this year.
The mistakes have had severe consequences for the state and for at least one person who was improperly placed on the public registry website.
A Windham County man who was improperly identified as a sex offender was subsequently beaten and harassed by community members. He won a $20,000 settlement after suing the state.
Flynn said his new working group, which includes Department of Corrections commissioner Andy Pallito and members of the Vermont judicial system, is determined to get it right this time.
“We are working on this,” Flynn said. “We are trying to do this in an efficient way that makes sense. We want to get the right thing done."
In the legislation that created the sex-offender public registry, lawmakers forbade listing the offenders’ addresses. (Their towns are currently listed.) Instead, the law created a trigger provision in which addresses would only be posted if the registry passed muster with the state auditor.
Flynn said that when more progress is made in fixing the registry, he will recommend that Vermont begin listing offenders' addresses.
“There will come a point and time I will recommend to the legislature to make the policy decision that we are there,” Flynn said. ..Source.. by Mark Davis
July 31, 2014
Vermont Sex Offender Registry's Problems Persist
In May 2007, a Windham County teenager was convicted of having sexual contact with a 13-year-old girl when he was 17. He pleaded guilty. At his sentencing, a judge explicitly said the law called for him to be kept off the Vermont sex-offender registry because of his age at the time of the offense.
Nonetheless, at the insistence of a probation officer, the Vermont Crime Information Center, which manages the registry, posted his name on the registry. The man, then 21, had no warning, according to a lawsuit.
He received harassing phone calls, according to the suit. He couldn't get a job. A group of men smashed a beer bottle on his head, saying it was because of what he had done.
He complained to VCIC staff, but his profile remained on the public site for two years. He sued the state in federal court, and eventually recovered $20,000. His information was taken down, but not before private websites captured his image and profile. You can still find his info on those sites.
The young man's plight is not unique.
In 2010, an audit of Vermont's sex-offender registry found a litany of errors — including offenders missing from the registry, offenders incorrectly identified and people wrongfully branded as offenders — that brought the reliability of the entire program into question.
In response, the state spent more than $400,000 to implement a new database and pledged to hold regular interagency meetings to ensure a better flow of information.Four years after that first report, the state released a new audit of the program. Its findings?
Once again: a litany of errors — including offenders missing from the registry, offenders incorrectly identified and people wrongfully branded as offenders — that brings the reliability of the entire program into question.
Of 58 offender records that auditors randomly examined in detail, all but one had mistakes. While some of the errors were relatively minor — misspelling of names, wrong dates of convictions — nearly 11 percent of all 2,536 offender records had "critical errors."
Auditors found many of the recommendations made in 2010 had been ignored or only partially implemented.
"We would have hoped they would be further along at this point," Vermont Auditor Doug Hoffer said. "I think they understand the need to get back together and get this done. To have two audits basically say, 'You didn't get it right,' it's a kick in the ass."
Jeffrey Wallin, the VCIC director, acknowledged the mistakes but said that progress has been made since 2010. He said VCIC has struggled to interpret a convoluted law, has relied on flawed data from outside agencies and has been handicapped by poor technology that is only now falling into place.
"We do see where there is room for improvement, but improvements have been made over the last four years, and we do that with very limited resources," Wallin said. "We are ready to work with our partners to improve the system."
Vermont created a registry of sex offenders in 1996 as part of an escalating national crackdown on sex crimes.
At first, only law-enforcement officials could access the information. Then, in 2004, legislators created a second registry, a public one, to be made available on the internet and managed by VCIC, which is part of the Department of Public Safety. There are more people on the private registry than the public registry. Some lesser crimes, including lewd and lascivious conduct, do not merit inclusion on the public site. Additionally, offenders younger than age 18 are not supposed to appear on the public list.
The public registry, which contains records of more than 1,172 offenders, provides each offender's age, physical description, crime, conviction date and mug shot, and allows the public to search for individuals by town or county. The most serious offenders are required to be on the registry for life, but most are registered for 10 years after they leave prison or probation.
In 2009, a 12-year-old Braintree girl was raped and murdered by her uncle, a repeat sex offender. Michael Jacques' heinous crime prompted lawmakers to expand the list of offenses that merit inclusion on the public site. They also decided that offenders' home addresses should be made available.
Concerned that inaccurate addresses could potentially cause harm, lawmakers added a trigger provision to the legislation: Street addresses would only be posted if the Vermont state auditor examined the registry and determined that VCIC was up to the task.
Apparently, it isn't.
When the 2010 audit report found that data was largely entered manually and "controls were not always documented or consistently applied," according to former Vermont auditor Tom Salmon, the state invested more than $400,000 — more than half from a federal grant — to buy OffenderWatch, a database built by WatchSystems LLC. In a 2013 press release, officials praised the new registry management system for mimimizing "manual entry," saying it would "improve the quality and accuracy of the information maintained by the database."
Additionally, following an auditor's recommendation, the Department of Corrections and the judiciary — the agencies that collect data on sex offenders — and the VCIC agreed to meet regularly to smooth data flow and reduce errors.
Last week, the Vermont Auditor's Office released the results of its follow-up exam. They weren't much better.
Hoffer found:
18 people listed on the public registry who shouldn't have been. That includes nine people who committed lesser offenses and nine more who were either still in prison or whose 10-year registration period had lapsed.
53 people who qualified for posting on the public registry but were not included.
20 people identified as lifetime registrants in the private registry but who were eligible to come off after 10 years.
Why have the mistakes persisted?
Of 13 recommendations made to improve the system in 2010, only three have been fully implemented, Hoffer concluded. VCIC is still entering information by hand and is guided by poor or nonexistent procedures.
The working group had convened twice, but kept no minutes and disbanded in spring 2011.
More significantly, OffenderWatch has not been a panacea. Many key decisions are still not automated, leaving VCIC staff to enter information about offenders as they always have: by hand, using their own judgment to interpret the 41-page law guiding the registry's requirements.
Perhaps the most important decision — whether an offender should be posted on the public registry — is made by an individual unchecked by either OffenderWatch, which lacks the system logic to automate that decision, or a human supervisor.
Furthermore, the person making that crucial decision has little more than institutional memory to go on, because VCIC has not developed complete written procedures, the auditor found. In many cases, VCIC staffers are simply winging it.
For example, in 2010, VCIC employees were under the impression that only those convicted in Vermont courts could be subject to lifetime registration. In 2013, VCIC employees had come to believe that out-of-state offenders, too, could be made to register for life. (The answer is still being debated.)
By law, sex offenders who are no longer on probation, but who are still required to undergo treatment, must submit a form to VCIC certifying that they are doing so. If they don't, their profiles can be added to the public registry.
But VCIC has no process for tracking the forms and no way of knowing if those offenders are fulfilling their treatment obligations, both audits found.
Similarly, sex offenders are required to submit an annual form to VCIC verifying their addresses. If they don't, VCIC is supposed to notify the local prosecutor to obtain an arrest warrant.
Between March and November of 2013, the auditor randomly examined the records of 15 people who presumably had their addresses verified: Six had actually failed to send a letter. In at least 49 cases, VCIC never notified prosecutors when offenders' didn't register.
Wallin said that most of the problems stem from VCIC's adjustment to the OffenderWatch system.
"It's a significant challenge," Wallin said. "We're still in the process of hammering out the procedures."
Moreover, VCIC may be fundamentally ill-suited to the task of managing a proactive, highly regulated police tool. VCIC mostly crunches crime data and issues statistical reports. Managing the registry and interpreting a law that even veteran defense attorneys say is confusing requires legal judgment.
"If you're looking at the statutes, they're not straightforward to begin with," Wallin said. "There's a fair amount of time spent on trying to determine whether or not the individual is compelled by law to register."
The problems fuel concerns that the registry may do as much harm as good. Some argue that it offers the illusion of security with little understanding of the nature of most sex crimes.
Most studies show that between 80 and 90 percent of sex crimes are committed not by strangers, but by people whom the victims know well.
"I don't think it does anything to protect the public," said Seth Lipschutz, an attorney with the Vermont Prisoners' Rights Office, who has represented hundreds of sex offenders. "In every era, there are people that society loves to hate. Whether it's African Americans, Jews ...people from various ethnic groups ... Now we have a PC society. Who is left to hate anymore? Pretty much nobody, except terrorists and sex offenders. They're kind of the witches of our era." ..Source.. by Mark Davis
July 23, 2014
Lawmakers not ready to post sex offenders’ addresses online
Lawmakers on Tuesday held off on deciding whether the state sex offender registry is good enough to allow offenders’ addresses to be posted online.
State law says an audit of the error-ridden registry must be “favorable” before the state can post home addresses of sex offenders on the Internet sex offender registry.
After a 2010 audit found major problems, State Auditor Doug Hoffer last week released a new audit report that found persistent problems, though there were fewer issues than in the previous audit. Hoffer’s office found 253 offender records in the registry with major errors, or 11 percent of the total number of records in the registry.
The problem is, Hoffer’s office won’t say whether the audit is favorable.
“It’s up to you to decide what margin of error is acceptable,” he told lawmakers Tuesday at a meeting of the Joint Corrections Oversight Committee.
Lawmakers declined to pass judgment on whether 253 “critical errors” are too many, but not without disagreement around the committee table.
Rep. Sandy Haas, P/D-Rochester, said the committee should put in writing that the audit is not favorable. Rep. Bill Lippert, D-Hinesburg, agreed.
“I do not find this a favorable audit,” he said.
Sen. Dick Sears, D-Bennington, said to admit the audit is not positive could create fodder for a lawsuit from a defense attorney. He also worried a judgment would be binding and perhaps require another audit before the addresses can go online.
Meanwhile, the Vermont Criminal Information Center has fixed almost all of the errors that were discovered by auditors. Some of the underlying causes of the latest problems were similar to the issues that plagued the 2010 audit, Hoffer’s report said.
Although the audit does not rule whether it is “favorable,” it does recommend that public safety, corrections and court reconvene a previously established working group to assess and possibly redesign the process for putting information into the registry. ..Source.. by Laura Krantz
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
