Rock sheriff's office to share in money from sale of sex offender's home

8-23-17 Wisconsin:

JANESVILLE -- Rock County Sheriff Robert Spoden is scheduled to receive a check Wednesday for $153,660.

Acting United States Attorney for the Western District of Wisconsin Jeffrey M. Anderson will present the check, according to a sheriff's office news release.

The money is the sheriff's office portion of proceeds from the sale of a town of Newark property that belonged to convicted sex offender David G. Wenzel.

Capt. Todd Christiansen of the sheriff's office said the sheriff's office has not decided how to use the money.

A spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office said the money must be used for a law enforcement purpose -- things such as operations, investigations, training, equipment or drug and gang education and awareness programs.

Christiansen said the money can't be used to buy weapons or to supplant funding in the sheriff's budget, and it can't be used for vehicles without special permission.

There is no deadline for when the money must be spent, Christiansen said. ..Continued..

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Communities reviewing sexual offender ordinances in wake of federal ruling

6-19-17 Wisconsin:

RACINE COUNTY — At least three communities in Racine County are reviewing their sex offender residency ordinances after a federal judge found that similar rules in Pleasant Prairie were unconstitutional.

In recent weeks, the villages of Caledonia and Waterford, and the Town Yorkville have discussed tweaking their ordinances in the wake of the ruling, and pending legal challenges in other municipalities, including the City of Milwaukee.

Caledonia Village Trustee Kevin Wanggaard, who serves as the chairman of the village’s Legislative and Licensing Committee, said examining their ordinance makes sense in light of the recent ruling.

“We try to get out in front of these things,” Wanggaard said. “It’s about making sure our citizens are safe, and making sure we are doing what we need to do to be lawful.”

Civil rights

At issue with the ordinances under review are buffer zones that limit where registered sex offenders can live. Pleasant Prairie’s ordinance originally banned any sex offender from living within 3,000 feet of a school, park, day care or other area where children congregate. Also under review are “original domicile” restrictions that ban sex offenders from moving to a municipality if they didn’t live there when their crime was committed.

U.S. District Judge J. P. Stadtmueller ruled in April that such restrictions in Pleasant Prairie essentially banished sex offenders without providing clear evidence that the restrictions would protect their citizenry. ..Continued..

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

State's sex offender registry is big-time draw

I am sure the author of this article went by what he was told as to statistics and vigilantism, but reality is far different. This states total population is 5,686,986, is 19 million page views a reality? As best we can figure is, somebody is alarming residents telling them to unnecessarily check the registry (also see comments)! We have documented, as of today, 22 major cases of harassment and vigilantism; 6 murder/killing of sex offenders someone needs to enlighten Knutson...

2-6-17 Wisconsin:

Wisconsinites are serious about keeping tabs on the state’s 24,000-plus convicted sex offenders.

Consider this: In 2016, the sections of the state Department of Corrections’ website relating to details on sex offenders generated 19 million page views. In addition, the DOC’s sex offender registry, offender locator and "Wisconsin’s Most Wanted" averaged a combined 481,000 visits per month.

Corrections officials say the sex offender registry has been a go-to resource for citizens to check on everyone from youth sports coaches, to prospective babysitters and daycare providers, to adults who direct children’s plays and musicals.

“It’s helpful,” said Grace Knutson, director of sex offender programs for the Department of Corrections. “They are using it as it was intended.”

Of the 24,457 offenders who were on the Wisconsin registry as of mid-January, 5,914 were incarcerated, 5,814 were on community supervision and 12,729 were off community supervision, according to Tristan Cook, communications director for the DOC.

“The registry in Wisconsin works very well,” said Matt Kuether, an investigator with the Appleton Police Department.

The number of sex offender registrants – both on and off supervision – is about 275 in Appleton, he said.

“The biggest thing I talk to people about (is) the registry is an informational tool. It’s not meant to be a punishment,” Kuether said.

Professor: Registries are 'worthless'

While sex offender registries have been in place nationwide since the 1990s, some contend that they do more harm than good.

“I think they’re terrible and worthless – worse than worthless. They are damaging,” said Emily Horowitz, professor and chairperson of the Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice at St. Francis College in Brooklyn, N.Y.

“There’s no evidence that they decrease (the number of) sex offenders or have made anyone safer,” Horowitz said.

The vast majority of victims are assaulted by someone they know – not by a stranger, she said.

“There’s a culture of fear. We are all scared all the time and the registries affect that fear. They think sex predators are around every corner, and that’s not true,” Horowitz said.

Horowitz said she doesn’t oppose punishment for sex offenders, but contends that being on a publicly available list can create difficulties.

“If you are on the registry, you will never be able to change your life,” she said. “They have wives and families, and they are publicly branded (as sex offenders). Nobody has any sympathy for them."

Vigilantism concerns unfounded

Wisconsin’s sex offender registry has grown significantly over the years. In 1998, there were 10,000 offenders on the list. Now, the list has swelled beyond 24,500 – roughly the size of the city of Neenah.

Knutson, the DOC’s sex offender program director, said 25 to 75 new registrants are added each month. The number of offenders on the registry remains stable because two-thirds are on the list for life, she said.

When the public was given access to names and addresses more than a decade ago, some feared that it could lead to incidents of vigilantism. But that hasn’t happened, according to Knutson.

“We haven’t seen the (sex offender registry) used for anything other than (it was intended),” she said.

Kuether, the Appleton police investigator, said vigilantism “hasn’t been an issue.”

“I cannot think of any person who was harassed

,” he said. ..Source.. by Andy Thompson

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

“If this is winning, I don’t want it:” Convicted sex offender talks about life after being released from prison

9-13-16 Wisconsin:

MILWAUKEE -- On the morning of July 5th, a white van left Fox Lake Correctional Institution. In the back, Matthew Schechter, a Milwaukee man with a history of sex crimes.

As a young man in the late '80s, he had sex with two teenage girls; in the mid-'90s, forceful sexual assaults on adult women. After 22 years in prison, he’s getting out, his time served.

No one wants a sex offender like Matt Schechter living next door to them, and it’s certainly understandable. Municipalities across the state have codified this with ordinances that restrict where offenders can live. But are those restrictions really keeping you safe?

Four hours after leaving Fox Lake, Matt Schechter walks out of the state building on 6th Street -- his first steps into freedom after 22 years. Where those steps will lead him, he doesn't know. The prison van left him here to be processed by parole and fitted with a GPS monitor.

"They didn't have any answers for me,” Matt says. “No housing options. Just, 'We're gonna put you on this GPS bracelet, and good luck.’ That's all they told me," Schechter said.

The maze he will try to navigate over the next 48 hours spotlights serious issues with sex offender residency requirements in Wisconsin. By state law, sex offenders have to return to the county in which they lived when they committed their crime. For Matt, that's Milwaukee. However, there are 19 municipalities in Milwaukee county, each with different restrictions on where he can live -- various buffer zones around areas children might be -- schools, parks, daycares and so on. No one has given him any information on what those rules are, and he knows one wrong move can put him back in prison.

After stopping at a bank to cash a check his father in Germany sent him to get started, he boards a bus for Walmart.

"I feel pretty anxious and nervous," he says as the bus rolls south on 27th Street. "I probably only have enough to get by for a few days," Schechter said.

At Walmart, Schechter picks up supplies and a cell phone. He has to call his parole agent to advise her where he's staying, once he figures out where that is. Sex offenders don't get a map of areas they can live when they get out prison and they don't get a list of approved addresses. They're directed to decipher the buffer zones on their own.

But first, the cell phone is a challenge. Immediately it becomes clear, things have changed in 22 years. He struggles for an hour to figure out how it works.

Finally, once he gets it working, he calls Oak Creek Police. He’s not allowed to access the internet. He’s heard there are some motels on South 27th where he may be able to stay the night. They give him the green light for one night. But time is running out. The battery on his GPS monitor is low.

"It’s only good for 12 hours. If I don't charge it and it goes off, there will be a warrant issued for my arrest," Schechter said.

So Schechter starts walking south, hoping to make it to a motel in time: A homeless sex offender, deemed by the state to be so dangerous he'll remain on the registry for life, strolling the street at night looking for a place to stay.

“You can see what a mess this has become,” says Republican State Representative Joel Kleefisch. He’s been pushing for a statewide standard, a uniform buffer zone everywhere, but he's getting pushback.

“No municipality wants to be told that their specific rules shouldn't be in place. If you're a municipal leader you want to tell your citizens 'we don't have any place in this municipality for sex offenders to live,'" Kleefisch said.

Matt eventually did find a vacant motel room for the night, plugs in his GPS, and talks about his past.

“In 1994, I had a lot of anger. I had a lot of issues growing up, and I didn't know how to ask for help. I didn't know how to talk to people, and along the way I hurt a lot of people," Schechter said.

In prison, Schechter explains he did five years of therapy, including sex offender treatment , and drug and alcohol treatment.

“Ultimately, I want the same thing everybody else wants . I want to get a job, and go to school, and make a life for myself," Schechter said.

But the next day, Schechter is on the move again.

"Every place you try to stay is illegal. The shelters won't take me because of my status," Schechter said.

And Schechter has had to leave Oak Creek because the city, along with 15 other municipalities in Milwaukee County, has what’s called an Original Domicile Restriction: If you didn't live there when you went to prison... You're not allowed to live there when you get out -- anywhere.

No one tells sex offenders that when they're released. It's another avenue in the maze they have to figure out.

As the night gets late, Schechter tries to find a blanket to sleep with for the night, but strikes out. With nowhere to turn, he walks into a Milwaukee Police station and has a stroke of luck. An officer, sympathetic to his situation, says he can stay in the park next door.

Schechter shows us where he’ll be sleeping: "Back there are some benches underneath those trees. So I'll just use my duffel bag as a pillow and put on my jeans - try to keep some of the bugs off," Schechter said.

48 hours after Schechter was set free, as the sun rises over MacArthur Square the next morning, he is in violation of Milwaukee's sex offender ordinance -- the park, smack in the middle of a child safety zone. But with nowhere for him to go and with the blessings of police, his parole agent approves it.

"Well, I'm disappointed in that," snaps Alderman Bob Donovan.

Donovan sponsored the most recent restriction on sex offenders in the city. In April, Milwaukee re-defined the word "residence" to mean a place where a person sleeps at night. So now, it's illegal for a registered sex offender like Schechter to even fall asleep within the city's safety zones. Fifteen other municipalities in Milwaukee county have the same measure, taking away the exemption for a temporary place to sleep.

"The purpose of the legislation was to close that loophole," explains Donovan.

Where are they supposed to stay?

"Well, not in Milwaukee," said Donovan.

But one week later, that's still where Matt Schechter is sleeping -- in the same park, next to the police station.

“I know it feels good to people to say, 'Oh yeah, we did something.' But look at what you're doing. It's not designed to keep children and other people safe. It may look that way, but it's really designed to make it impossible for sex offenders to find anywhere to live. So they're forced to go somewhere else. The problem is, the ways the state laws are written. We can't go anywhere else," Schechter said.

So where in Milwaukee can Schechter live? The city has a 2,000 foot buffer zone, leaving just pockets of possibilities. Most aren't even residential. A car dealership, for example; the parking lot of a pet supply company; the 10th hole at Tripoli Country Club; the taxiway at Timmerman; the coal piles on Carferry Dr.; a section of St. Adalbert's Cemetery; and most of Mitchell International Airport.

In the entire city, there are just 55 addresses approved for sex offenders. FOX6 Investigators checked them against the sex offender registry, and found there is not a single sex offender living in any of them. Most are single family homes -- not for sale and not for rent. The few multi-units don't allow felons.

"It’s catastrophic," says Wendel Hruska of Project Return, a program that tries to help former inmates transition. He's seen how being homeless drives sex offenders underground and off the grid.

"Those individuals can't really function," Hruska said.

"And that means they have nothing to lose," adds psychologist Anna Salter, who has studied the sex offender mind. “It`s definitely a risk factor for re-offense.”

"They're stuck," says Hruska.

Stuck, like Matt Schechter.

One month after his release from prison we check up on him. He's found a full-time job, but he can't find a place to live. Each night after his second shift, he returns to the park, and puts up his tent.

We notice Schechter’s mood is much darker than it was a month ago.

"I`m considering just saying f--k the whole thing and turning myself back in," Schechter said with frustration. "Even in prison you have federal civil rights to a bed and a bathroom. If this is winning, I don't want it."

Today, more than a month after our last interview with Schechter, he has finally found a place to stay in West Milwaukee –- one of the three municipalities that doesn’t have the original domicile restriction. However, there are more than 230 other sex offenders still on the streets in Milwaukee County. ..Source.. by Brad Hicks

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

State Assembly passes bill restricting where violent sex offenders can live

2-10-16 Wisconsin:

MADISON, Wis. —The Wisconsin Assembly has signed off on a bill creating uniform restrictions on where violent sex offenders can live.

Right now, municipalities use ordinances to determine where sex offenders can't live. The bill would bar violent sex offenders from living within 1,500 feet of any school, day care, youth center, church or public park anywhere in the state.

If the sex offender committed a crime against a child, he couldn't live next door to a child. If the offender committed the crime against an elderly or disabled person, he couldn't live within 1,500 feet of a nursing home or other assisted-living facility.

Local ordinances would generally remain enforceable.

The Assembly approved the bill 64-34 on Tuesday. The measure goes next to the state Senate. ..Source.. by WISN.com

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Manitowoc sex offender ordinance approved

A note for folks who may not realize this: Ordinances are laws issued by local officials.

12-22-15 Wisconsin:

Convicted sex offenders from outside Manitowoc can no longer legally be placed within the city limits after the City Council approved an ordinance regulating such placements.

The council Dec. 21 unanimously approved the ordinance, which prohibits any convicted sex offender from residing or being placed on supervised release within the city limits unless the offender lived in the city at the time of the offense or previously resided in the city for more than five years.

Exemptions to the ordinance include if the offender already lives in the city, if the offender is a minor, or if the residence belongs to the offender's parents, grandparents, siblings, spouse or child, as long as the person "established the residence at least five years before the designated offender established residence at that location."

Additional regulations contained in the ordinance include penalties for property owners knowingly renting to unauthorized offenders, and penalties for any offender caught loitering within 500 feet of schools, parks and other places kids congregate.

Penalties range from $300 to $1,000. An appeal process is included in the ordinance allowing offenders to make a case for special placement within the city. Appeals must go before the city's Public Safety Committee, chief of police and City Council.

The need for the ordinance arose after convicted sex offender Mark R. Rickert, who is not from Manitowoc, was placed within the city.

Because some of the ordinances around the state are so restrictive, there is no place to put sex offenders in the municipalities from which they came. That means the Wisconsin Department of Health Services has to look elsewhere for placement.

When beginning to discuss the ordinance, a distance restriction that would have kept offenders from living within a certain distance of the aforementioned locations was included. Council members decided creating those "safe zones" would also create other zones with high concentrations of sex offenders.

Instead, the council decided to use the ordinance as a way to keep outside offenders from being placed within the city.

"We're limiting the outsiders," said Eric Sitkiewitz, council president. "I think that's the important thing in this ordinance."

Ald. Chris Able, chairman of the Public Safety Committee, which first discussed the ordinance, said he's happy with the final result.

"I think this is an important step forward for better safety for everybody," Able said.

Even with the ordinance in place, Ald. Jim Brey said everyone needs to remain vigilant in keeping the city safe.

"Don't be afraid to call the police department if you have concerns," Brey said. "They will gladly respond and be part of the solution."

The City of Two Rivers also approved a similar ordinance. ..Source.. by Marcus Nesemann

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Public Defenders Office Questions Sex Offender Housing Bills

12-18-15 Wisconsin:

Proposed Changes Would Set Distance Requirements From Schools, Other Public Places

An attorney from the Wisconsin State Public Defender's Office wants changes to a bill that would restrict housing options for released sex predators, saying it could put the state's civil commitment law in constitutional jeopardy.

If it passes, the bill would bar the state from placing patients released from the Sand Ridge Secure Treatment Center from living within 1,500 feet of schools, parks, churches and daycare centers. Communities across the state have passed local ordinances that are even more stringent.

Attorney Robert Peterson, who heads the SPD's sex offender unit is pushing for language to be included in the bill that would pre-empt those local rules.

"To allow local municipalities to overrule state law and frustrate these placements and keep people institutionalized, I think, is constitutionally invalid," Peterson said.

Another bill that has yet to have a hearing would establish statewide buffer zones for all sex offenders overriding local ordinances. Authors of the two bills have said they will try to combine the them.

But according to Peterson, research in other states has found buffer zones aren't effective at preventing future sex crimes.

He advocates using a risk assessment tool to determine which offenders are the most likely to reoffend, saying research has found that sex offenders have much lower reoffense rate if they are allowed to live in a structured community setting.

But Racine Republican state Sen. Van Wanggaard, who's sponsoring one of the bills, said communities need some protection from offenders who have committed violent sex crimes.

"We just don't want to have that person close to our loved ones and people who potentially can't protect themselves," he said. ..Source..

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Former sex offenders left out in the cold by city residency restrictions

12-15-15 Wisconsin:

A City of Milwaukee ordinance passed by the Common Council in July 2014 is making it nearly impossible for former sex offenders to find housing. The ordinance restricts these ex-offenders from living within 2,000 feet of any school, licensed day care center, park, recreation trail or playground.

As of Jan. 16, 2015, the city released a public notice listing 55 addresses — 117 units, according to a Department of Corrections (DOC) field supervisor — where released sex offenders can legally reside under the new law. The list includes private residences that are currently occupied and multiple-unit buildings that have refused to rent to sex offenders.

“We do not in any way represent that these properties are available to rent or live in,” said Milwaukee City Clerk Jim Owczarski, who noted ironically that the list is “the best reference document” for sex offenders trying to find housing.

He added, “It’s frankly not the city’s role … to find housing for sexual offenders.”

Thomas Salter, a DOC field supervisor for sex offenders at Unit 330, said the city ordinance is “the most difficult thing that my agents have to deal with.” Salter said 40 individuals currently under his supervision are homeless.

“It’s not something that’s helpful, it’s not something that makes our community safe, it’s not something that’s even just decent,” he said. “But, it’s something that we have to deal with because of our city council’s decisions.”

One of the people affected by the ordinance is Raymond Rosa, 49, who was released on parole in June and is homeless. Rosa and his girlfriend Malina Oglesby, 52, who had a home together before Oglesby filed for bankruptcy, had been staying with her mother with the permission of Rosa’s parole officer.

At the end of June, the couple was kicked out because there were “too many people in one house,” according to Rosa. Since then, they’ve moved from place to place in a van Rosa jerry-rigged with batteries, which provide a small amount of electricity to power the couple’s breathing machines — both Rosa and Oglesby have sleep apnea — and the GPS bracelet he wears on his ankle. Rosa even installed an air conditioner during the hot summer months.

Oglesby said she has seen other homeless people with nothing more than a bag and a pillow. Rosa, who referred to himself as “a survivalist,” acknowledged they’re better off than some but he’s still unsure about what the Wisconsin winter will bring.

Rosa said he petitioned DOC to let him serve out his time on supervision, which goes through September 2016, in prison. Rosa received a letter in response stating a request for voluntary incarceration will not be approved if the offender “seeks to avoid supervision.”

“I don’t know if I’m gonna make it through this winter,” he said. “I don’t know if she’s gonna make it through the winter. Anybody that doesn’t take an insurance [policy] out on me is an idiot.”

Misconceptions

The preamble to the city ordinance that restricts where sex offenders can live calls them “an extreme threat to the public safety” who are “extremely likely to use physical violence and to repeat their offenses.” It says the cost to society is, “while incalculable, clearly exorbitant” and claims the intent of the ordinance is “not to impose a criminal penalty” but to improve the health, safety and welfare of citizens.

“That’s an awfully broad brush to be painting all sex offenders [with],” said Larry Dupuis, legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Wisconsin. “People who have been convicted of sex offenses are quite variable. Unfortunately, most of these laws treat them all as identical.”

In fact, nationwide, only 5.3 percent of sex offenders re-offend within three years of their release. More than nine out of 10 had not previously been convicted of a sex crime; most victims are known to the perpetrator; and treatment can have a significant effect on whether or not a sex offender will re-offend. In Wisconsin, sex offenders deemed to be at high risk of reoffending are confined to sex offender treatment facilities under a 1994 law.

Dupuis, who was involved in an unsuccessful challenge to a similar South Milwaukee ordinance, said residency restrictions on sex offenders “are largely driven by misconceptions.” Among them is the idea of the “lurking sex offender,” which Dupuis called “fiction,” and the assumption that sex offenders are more likely to commit an offense closer to their homes.

All 19 municipalities in Milwaukee County have some type of residency ordinance that restricts where sex offenders can live. “The biggest problem with many of them is that they’re actually counterproductive. They make people’s lives less stable,” said Dupuis.

Dupuis added, “They have to live somewhere.”

He noted that an unstable environment can make it harder to access treatment or keep a job; that instability can also estrange a person from family or social support systems.

“We have family,” said Rosa. “I’ve got a brother, I’ve got a mother … she’s got brothers, she’s got sons. I can’t [live] there (because of the ordinance).”

Dupuis said, “There’s no doubt that these ordinances have created a homeless population,” adding, “if people really want to be safe, the last thing you want is for [sex offenders] to be homeless.”

In Limbo:

On Monday, Sept. 28, Milwaukee police arrested Rosa on South Hawley Court, a dead- end street where he and Oglesby had been periodically parking to sleep. According to a complaint Rosa filed with the City of Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission, he was taken into custody after a Hunger Task Force employee notified police of a suspicious vehicle. Rosa had an outstanding parole violation, stemming from a problem with the GPS tracking band he wears on his ankle; he said his parole officer had forgotten to remove the bogus violation from the computer system.

Rosa was released less than 24 hours later, and he returned to Hawley Court. According to the complaint, the arresting officer came back to check on the couple the next morning. Then, in the early morning hours of Oct. 1, a member of the police Homeless Outreach Team (HOT) drove Rosa to his brother’s house for water. By later that morning, however, another District 3 officer came to tell the couple they had to leave.

“We decided that we didn’t want him to be there any longer,” said Salter, adding, “we didn’t say anything to him about being in violation of the ordinance.”

Salter said Hunger Task Force Executive Director Sherrie Tussler told him that Rosa had been using a water supply without permission, was bathing in public and had “some rude, inappropriate interactions with staff.” The fact that the couple was staying in the van together also factored into the decision, according to Salter.

Rosa disputes that account. “I showered every day at my mom’s or my brother Joe’s — every day,” he said. “That’s why I stayed there, because it was four blocks from my brother’s house and I could just go there and take a shower every day, and charge up.”

When contacted about the incident, Tussler was not available and Hunger Task Force Communications Manager Julie Frinzi declined to comment.

Rosa said that, after being arrested, he was given permission to return to Hawley Court by his parole officer. HOT coordinator Lt. Liam Looney and Rosa spoke over the phone, as well. “He asked me a specific question about [whether he could] park on the city street by the Hunger Task Force,” said Looney. “And, what I told him was that he can park on a city street just like anybody could.”

But he was picked up again on Friday, Nov. 20. This time, Rosa was held for a week. He said he had stopped on the block to eat. “I can’t even park on that street; my dad’s buried right there,” he said. “I can’t even go visit my dad.”

In general, Salter said Rosa has been “up and down” about following his rules of supervision, which include weekly check-ins with his parole officer and weekly treatment sessions. He said there have been some small missteps but that “they haven’t been really significant violations that required … long-term incarceration or anything like that.”

Salter added, “For the most part, he’s been pretty good about it. He’s been a little bit frustrated with things, which is totally understandable.”

Rosa is afraid DOC is building a case to revoke his parole and send him back to prison. Were that to happen, Rosa would most likely be required to serve the remaining 15 months and 22 days of his sentence.

Joy Staab, director of public affairs for DOC, said, “If an offender who’s on supervision breaks rules, then the Department of Corrections has the authority to proceed with revocation.”

Wisconsin law says sex offenders on parole are to be released to the county in which the person resided on the date of the sex offense, the county in which the person was convicted of the sex offense or a sex offender treatment facility. Salter and Detective Ann Golombowski, who oversees sex offenders in Oak Creek, where Rosa was convicted, said he should be able to go there. Golombowski said a number of sex offenders live in a trailer park near S. 27th Street and W. College Avenue.

However, Rosa said, “They won’t let me go.”

For now, all he can do is wait. “I’m paying my debt to society and I will continue to pay it … then I’ll be gone, then I’ll leave this place … try to start my life over,” Rosa said.

He added, “I’ll find somewhere where they’ll accept me [as] a human being.”

Banishment

Numbers provided by Milwaukee Police Department Sgt. Timothy Gauerke show that 713 sex offenders are on active supervision in the city. So far this year, 121 citations have been issued in violation of the residency ordinance. “When an individual is cited, offenders can pay the citation or dispute it in court,” he said.

But Gauerke added, “Since someone that is homeless technically does not have a permanent or temporary address, they cannot be in violation.”

Gauerke said MPD has been requesting the GPS coordinates from DOC so the department knows where homeless sex offenders are actually staying. All homeless sex offenders on supervision are GPS-tracked.

According to Dupuis, “The crimes that people have committed, nobody is excusing them. But there are other awful crimes where people get a second chance.” He called the residency law a form of banishment. “For some reason … people have decided that sex offenders can be treated as lifetime pariahs, even if they don’t offend ever again.”

He added, “That’s incredibly harsh. Unfortunately, it’s still, at least in Wisconsin, politically popular.”

Owczarski noted, “From a policy perspective … the interest was not to find housing for sexual offenders. It was to state those areas in which they could not live.” He added that he doesn’t think the Common Council would remove its restrictions except as part of a comprehensive, statewide solution.

Dupuis noted that in some states, courts are starting to recognize that sex offender laws and, in particular, residency restrictions are bad policy. “They just, essentially, continue the punishment beyond a person’s criminal sentence,” he said.

Wisconsin State Senator Lena Taylor’s office is in the very early stages of researching a possible legislative solution. “I think the state does have a responsibility and I know … my desire is to see legislation done,” she said.

Craig Trost, Taylor’s communications director, said the goal is to create a statewide, uniform policy to give sex offenders a place to live while keeping the community safe. He said the senator intends to introduce legislation some time in 2016.

Until then, Taylor said local governments have “a responsibility to figure out how to help to place those individuals.” She also said there needs to be more cooperation among departments and agencies so that communities know when and where offenders are being released and are prepared to accommodate them.

Taylor added, “I think that we could be more proactive.” ..Source.. by Jabril Faraj

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Offender residency rejected

Follow the story, is there anyway someone can tell if a specific residence is prohibited, before renting or living there? Nothing is marked and even folks owning residences do not know if there residence is in a prohibited distance. This is insanity; political entrapment!

11-11-15 Wisconsin:

JEFFERSON — A 25-year-old registered sex offender has been denied his appeal to remain residing in the City of Jefferson.

The decision was made Tuesday evening during the Jefferson Sex Offender Residence Appeal Board meeting at the Jefferson Police Department.

In September 2005, Ronald L. Dukelow was adjudicated as a delinquent of first-degree sexual assault of a child under age 13 in Dodge County, court records show. As a result of that offense, he is required to comply with the state sex offender registry through Oct. 3, 2021.

For the past year, Dukelow has been living with his mother, grandparents and brother at 402 N. Center Ave. in Jefferson. Previously, he had resided in Fort Atkinson. The address change was recorded with the Jefferson County Clerk of Court’s office on May 27, 2015.

In September, Jefferson Police Department Detective Eric Weiss was notified that Duke­low was living at the new address, which raised concerns because in 2012, the city passed an ordinance that restricts registered sex offenders from residing within 1,500 feet of a designated child safety zone.

Two parochial schools and the city pool are within the 1,500-foot designated safety zone.

The City of Jefferson’s Sex Offender Residence Appeal Board was created in conjuction with the ordinance and offers registered sex offenders the opportunity to undergo an appeal process and see whether the board will grant them the chance to remain living at that location.

Weiss noted that in the past, some have been granted waivers, while others, like Dukelow, have been denied them. Through Tuesday’s appeal process, Dukelow was given the opportunity to plead his case and show why he is either rehabilitated, won’t reoffend or won’t be a perpetrator toward children.

In his alloted time, Dukelow said that were he allowed to remain living at the Center Avenue address, he “would stay in his house more and not be around their kids, and avoid the pool and school as much as possible.”

Dukelow’s mother, who also was in attendance Tuesday, added that she was unaware there even was an ordinance restricting registered sex offender residency until an officer showed up at their house.

The board also permitted citizen input from neighbors — many of who gave emotional testimony as to why they believe Dukelow is a danger to their neighborhood.

Dave Thompson, 214 E. Wilcox St., questioned why Dukelow was able to live at the residence for the past year. Weiss explained that the department was unaware Du­kelow was residing there until recently and immediately took action upon notification.

The detective added that when sex offenders register their addresses within the system, it is their responsibility to adhere to any ordinance enacted by the municipality they reside. Because each community has different ordinances regarding sex offenders, the registry cannot always be aware when an offender is living in a residence illegally.

Speaking next, Denise Sponem, 502 N. Center Ave., explained the close proximity of the pool and two schools to her and Dukelow’s address.

“Kids are walking by there all summer long,” Sponem said. “Not only do we have the kids from our neighborhood, but we have other children who walk through our neighborhood going to those schools on a regular basis.”

Sponem also mentioned Dukelow’s pending court case. He is charged with first-degree sexual assault of a child under 13 years old. He allegedly touched a 7-year-old girl in a sexual manner while she was playing a videogame.

“This is wrong, totally wrong; he should not be there,” Sponem said.

Originally charged in September 2014, Dukelow’s competency initially was raised at a hearing in October 2014 before Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge Jennifer Weston.

During a hearing in November 2014, a report by an examiner appointed by the Wisconsin Department of Health Services concluded that Dukelow was not competent, although he might become so with treatment.

Judge Weston suspended the case and committed Dukelow to the Department of Health Services for a term not to exceed 12 months, with regular reports on his mental state to be provided to the court at three, six and nine months.

By February 2015, a second competency evaluation was requested by Dukelow’s attorney. Upon the second analysis, he was found to be competent during a hearing in April 2015 and the case advanced.

However, the preliminary hearing in the case was adjourned in May when the investigating officer was not available. Subsequently, in June 2015, Dukelow’s attorney, Elizabeth Svehlek of the State Public Defender’s Office, again presented concerns about competency and requested an evaluation. Dukelow was found to be not competent and a new commitment order was endorsed by Judge Randy Koschnick in August 2015.

Last Thursday, Judge Kosch­nick found Dukelow to be competent based on his latest re-examination.

A pretrial conference was set for Wednesday, Nov. 18, and a preliminary hearing tentatively is scheduled for Tuesday, Nov. 24.

Dukelow faces a maximum sentence of 60 years in prison if convicted. He remains free on a $50,000 signature bond.

As conditions of his bond, Dukelow is to limit his travels to Jefferson County or any adjoining county, including Columbia, Rock, Dane, Dodge, Waukesha and Walworth. He is not permitted to travel beyond those borders.

In addition, he is not to have contact with his alleged victim or her family members and is not to be alone with or have any physical contact with any person he knows to be a minor.

Also speaking Tuesday was Chris Melinger, 402 N. Main St., who voiced concern for his 5-year-old daughter and the young children of his neighbors.

“This whole neighborhood is full of little girls,” he said. “This man should not be on the street right now. I don’t know how he is not being held without bail until this is resolved.”

Melinger added that “(Du­kelow) is putting the children in the neighborhood in danger, also himself in danger, and probably the people in the community, because if he touched my child, I don’t know what I would do ... I would protect my child whatever that takes.”

Nicole Lippert, 316 N. Main St., asked the appeals board to consider her 13-year-old child, who has to walk by Dukelow’s residence every day to get to school.

“We live in a small community and you wouldn’t think you have to worry about your kids like this, but I am telling you from experience of someone who was molested as a child, I will do absolutely whatever it takes — right, wrong or different — to make sure that no one will ever touch or harm my child.”

Lippert, like many in attendance Tuesday, questioned why the neighbors were not made aware of Dukelow residing at the address, as she would not have allowed her child to walk pass the house had she known.

Weiss explained that because Dukelow was a minor when convicted, his court records are sealed. Because the court records are not available to the public, he will not show up as a registered sex offender on the Wisconsin Sex Offender Registry, which is made available to the public online.

Rebecca Sande, 321 N. Sanborn Ave., voiced concern for her six children who range in age from one to 16.

“I don’t want my kids to feel like they are living in an unsafe neighborhood, but I can tell you there is kind of a spirit of fear,” Sande said. “I don’t like that my children have to be exposed to that.”

Sande also mentioned her concern for the city’s high ratio of sex offenders. Currently, Sande said, there are 30 registered sex offenders living among the city’s 8,000 residents.

Fighting back tears, Nicole Thompson, 214 E. Wilcox St., explained that she does not feel safe letting her children in her own backyard, which backs up to Dukelow’s.

“This is an area where people go to school, it’s an area where they go to the pool, where they go ice skating, where they use the sledding hill,” she said. “He has a right to live somewhere; he does not have a right to live near our children. It is a hotspot for children. You might as well put him in the middle of a playground and say, ‘Here let him babysit.’”

Thompson questioned why the city even is holding a meeting when there already is an ordinance stating that Dukelow cannot live at the residence in question.

“We enforce opposite-side parking ordinances; we don’t have meetings about them. It’s an ordinance; let’s enforce it,” Thompson said.

Board Chair Jim Horn explained that as part of the ordinance, they are required to allow an appeal process for anyone who would like to plead his or her case to the city.

Also in attendance was Sue Loof, principal of St. John the Baptist Catholic School, one of the two schools within the safety zone surrounding Dukelow’s address.

“My job is to keep our kids safe, so, too, I plead with you to help him find a place to live outside of the safety zone,” Loof said.

After a closed-session discussion, the Sex Offender Residence Appeal Board unanimously denied Dukelow’s request.

Dukelow now is required to vacate the residence “as soon as reasonably possible,” Weiss said.

The detective added that Dukelow will be allowed to visit the residence, but he cannot live there. Regular checks will be made at the address in order to enforce the ordinance. A fine of $1,000 a day is in place for anyone who violates it.

Many neighbors in attendance Tuesday still questioned the enforcibility of the ordinance if Dukelow still is allowed to visit the residence, but Weiss assured them that the Jefferson Police Department, so far, has never had a situation where someone remained after being denied residency.

He added as an extra safety measure, “if you see him outside the house, you call us.”

As a past offender, Dukelow is to maintain compliance with the Wisconsin Sex Offender Registry.

As conditions of his bond, he is required to continue living with his mother as long as she lives within the counties to which he is limited.

It was not clear how the board’s decision would affect this condition. ..Source.. by Amy Wunderlin

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Sex offender ordinance moved on to council

11-5-15 Wisconsin:

Restrictions on where sex offenders can be placed within the city of Manitowoc could soon be on the books.

The Public Safety Committee on Wednesday, Nov. 4, approved having city attorney Kathleen McDaniel and Police Chief Tony Dick draft a sex offender placement ordinance for the City Council's consideration.

The city has no such ordinance. All committee members said they agreed an ordinance is necessary, so ironing out the details was all that needed to be done at the meeting.

The committee first had to decide a distance restriction to recommend. Ordinances around the state vary greatly in terms of distance, ranging from 500 feet to 3,500 feet from schools, parks and other places kids congregate.

In an effort to get an ordinance to the council as quickly as possible, Committee Chairman Chris Able suggested using 1,500 feet as a starting point. The council could then alter that distance as it sees fit, he said.

Other committee members wanted to start with a higher threshold, however. Ald. Eric Sitkiewitz said 2,000 feet should be the starting point. Ald. Jason Sladky agreed, making a motion to include that distance in the ordinance. His motion was unanimously approved.

Additional restrictions to be contained within the ordinance include penalties for landlords who knowingly rent to sex offenders within the restricted boundaries, penalties for sex offenders loitering around restricted areas and an appeal process for sex offenders to be placed within the restricted areas.

The council will debate the ordinance at its meeting Nov. 16.

The need for the ordinance arose after convicted sex offender Mark R. Rickert, who is not from Manitowoc, was placed within the city.

Because some of the ordinances around the state are so restrictive, there is no place to put sex offenders in the municipalities from which they came. That means the Wisconsin Department of Health Services has to look elsewhere for placement.

Five sex offenders have been placed in Manitowoc in 2015, including Rickert. Rickert lives at 7420 Calumet Ave. with Rene Rodriguez, another convicted sex offender who was placed in the residence in June. Rickert moved in Nov. 3.

The ordinance will have no affect on sex offenders already placed in the community. ..Source.. by Marcus Nesemann

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Wisconsin lawmaker seeks to change state law regarding local sex offender residency rules

9-11-15 Wisconsin:

GREEN BAY, Wis. — A Wisconsin lawmaker has proposed a change in state law that would end the ability of the state's municipalities to set their own local rules on sex offender residency.

The bill would create a statewide standard limiting sex offenders from coming within 1,000 feet of parks, schools and other gathering places for children. It also would require the state Department of Corrections to try to place sex offenders within the municipality where they committed the crime.

Republican state Rep. Joel Kleefisch, who authored the bill, said sex offenders are released without supervision in some areas after judges have ruled the local ordinances are unconstitutionally restrictive.

Most cities, villages and towns in Brown County already require people who commit sex crimes to live at least 1,500 feet from designated gathering places for children.

Officials in least one municipality, Green Bay, have drafted a resolution opposing the bill, Press-Gazette Media (http://gbpg.net/1K0t5jf ) reported.

Green Bay alderman Chris Wery said the bill would "gut" the city's 2007 ordinance banning sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of gathering places for children. He said the city had become a "dumping ground" for the sex offenders in Brown County prior to the ordinance, which essentially blocks them from living almost anywhere in the city, unless they're granted an exemption by the city's Sex Offender Residency Board.

Brown County has 616 registered sex offenders, and 471 of them live in Green Bay, according to the Department of Corrections.

Some surrounding municipalities passed similarly restrictive rules to stop the influx of offenders who couldn't find a place to live in Green Bay after larger city adopted the ordinance. Bellevue created a 2,500-foot buffer for sex offender residency in December.

Supporters of the Kleefisch's proposed bill argue that it would help sex offenders who currently are forced to go underground because they can't find anywhere to live due to the increasingly restrictive local ordinances.

Nearly 360 sex offenders in Wisconsin are reported as homeless, according to the Department of Corrections. ..Source.. by Star Tribune

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

City could ban sex offenders from DOC facility

9-8-15 Wisconsin:

The Shawano Common Council will take another look at sex offender residency restrictions with an eye toward keeping registered sex offenders out of a new Department of Corrections transitional living facility.

The city has an ordinance restricting where registered sex offenders can live, but officials were apparently under the impression that state statutes required an exception for DOC facilities.

“I guess we were thinking that there was nothing that we could do,” Mayor Lorna Marquardt said at a special meeting of the council Wednesday. That turns out not to be correct, she said.

“If we chose to do it, we could put in a stipulation in our ordinance that would disallow sexual offenders from being placed in temporary housing,” she said.

Milwaukee-based Matt Talbot Recovery Services has contracted with the DOC to operate a six-bed facility at 118 S. Union St. According to city officials, the facility is slated to open in mid-October.

The city cannot keep the DOC from contracting with a vendor to operate a transitional living facility, as long as the location is not within 2,000 feet of another community-based residential facility, but there is no state statute preventing the city from applying its sex offender residency restrictions to that location.

The city restricts convicted sex offenders from living within 1,500 feet of any facility where children are likely to congregate, including any facility used for or that supports a school for children, licensed day care center, library, park, recreational trail, playground or place of worship.

The Union Street location is within 1,500 feet of a park, library and the Shawano Recreation Center.

According to the city’s ordinance, an exception to the rule kicks in if the convicted sex offender “has been placed in a temporary living center by the Department of Corrections under electronic monitoring and said person meets with the Sexual Predator Ordinance Committee as requested.”

Though the Union Street facility could temporarily house a variety of recently released felons, most of those placed there are likely to be registered sex offenders.

Police Chief Mark Kohl said the bulk of recently released felons housed in transitional living placement facilities are sex offenders.

According to the state’s Sex Offender Registry website, the DOC has seven registered sex offenders housed at the New Era House, 105 E. Richmond St.

The DOC’s contract with New Era House expired last August, but the state has continued to house recently released offenders there until a new location could be found.

Marquardt said it is assumed at least six of those sex offenders would be moved to the new facility on South Union Street when it opens in October.

Marquardt said there are pros and cons to consider if action is taken to ban sex offenders from the DOC facility.

“Some people say it’s better if we know where they are,” she said.

However, Marquardt said, she has concerns about the lack of supervision proposed at the Union Street location.

“I would feel better if there was someone who actually was supervising these people in this home, but Talbot has told us previously that they don’t have an on-site person,” she said.

The residents will be on electronic monitoring, however, and will be checked by Talbot staff and DOC agents.

Marquardt said another option for the city could be to allow sex offenders at the site, but only if they’ve been approved by the sexual predator ordinance committee.

Council members were unanimous in their consensus that the city should revisit the ordinance when the council meets on Wednesday.

“With the outcry I have had on this from people, absolutely,” Alderman Bob Kurkiewicz said. ..Source.. by Tim Ryan

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Local Sex Offender Residency Restrictions Voided Under Proposed State Law

8-14-15 Wisconsin:

A map of Green Bay, nearly entirely coated in red, has made a symbolic statement for nearly a decade.

Unless granted an exception, sex offenders cannot live in all those red areas, about 90 percent of the city, because it’s within 2,000 feet of schools, parks, daycares or other places children generally congregate.

But a new law, recently proposed by state lawmakers, would void that and all other local residency restrictions across the state.

Assembly Bill 290 creates the first uniform bill regulating where sex offenders can live, no matter what community they’re in.

Under the proposal, a high-risk sex offender, one with certain offenses against children, would not be able to live within 1,000 feet of schools or daycares anywhere in the state.

It would cut in half the restriction Green Bay currently has.

At first glance, Alderman Chris Wery doesn’t like it.

“They’re really watering down what we’re trying to do in Green Bay. They take out the playground or park part. It’s still schools, but they take out the playground and park,” says Wery.

Law enforcement and Department of Corrections have said for years they’re worried sex offenders will go off the grid, with no indication where they really are, because residency restrictions are simply too tight.

Take the case of Roy O’Neal , the sex offender with a murder conviction we told you about Tuesday.

Court documents show the Department of Health Services searched for more than one year, but couldn’t find him a home, citing local housing restrictions.

Lawmakers say there are more than 400 sex offenders unaccounted for right now, sparking the need for the bill.

“The last thing we want is to push sex offenders underground. Right now there are judges who are saying some of these municipal codes are too strict and they’re letting them go. That can’t happen. When that happens, our children aren’t safe,” says Rep. Joel Kleefisch, (R) Oconomowoc, who authored the bill.

“We want to know where these individuals are going. If you make the law so restrictive that they can’t abide by it, they’re going to go underground. We won’t know where they are,” says Captain Dave Konrath with the Brown County Sheriff’s Office.

Green Bay also created its sex offender residency board to evaluate appeals individually.

While that’s not currently in the law, one board member hopes it will be.

“I’ve just seen the basics of the law, and it seems pretty one size fits all, and I think it needs to be a little bit more reviewed,” says Green Bay Sex Offender Residency Board Member Dean Gerondale.

Wery plans to bring this up in meetings with other Green Bay aldermen as soon as next week.

State lawmakers hope to hold a public hearing on it next month. ..Source.. by Sarah Thomsen

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Elkhorn City Council denies sex offender's appeal to live with parents

6-23-15 Wisconsin:

ELKHORN—Before he was told he could not live in Elkhorn with his parents Monday, convicted sex offender Michael Hoffman Jr. pleaded with city officials, saying he will carry his regrets and bad decisions with him until he dies.

“My crimes carry a lifelong penalty,” Hoffman told city council members. “I have the proverbial scarlet letter on my forehead until I die. No matter what I do, how good I do or what I accomplish, I will always be labeled a sex offender. There's not another crime a body can commit that carries the same parameters of penalty and/or lifetime tracking than the crime I committed.”

“I'm asking for some empathy and for a chance to move past my crimes, only for the purpose of residency,” he added later.

Hoffman, 45, was the first person to appeal the city's ordinance restricting where registered sex offenders can live.

The council denied his appeal on a 3-2 vote. Aldermen Scott McClory and Hoss Rehberg voted in favor of Hoffman's appeal.

“I've had no one come to me with concerns about him living in my district," said McClory, who represents the district where Hoffman wanted to live.

McClory has opposed the ordinance since its inception.

Hoffman filed for an exception to the ordinance May 15 after Elkhorn police visited him at his now-former residence at 408 Amparo St.

Hoffman, who moved to Elkhorn in early May, reported his change of address to the Wisconsin Department of Corrections Sex Offender Registry, which he is required to do. Elkhorn police then notified Hoffman that he was living within a restricted area and needed to appeal the ordinance.

The controversial ordinance, passed in October, prohibits registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of schools, parks, swimming pools, playgrounds and other places children frequent. However, it allows offenders to appeal the restrictions.

Since October, other Walworth County communities have approved similar ordinances.

Hoffman had hoped to be closer to family and friends by living with his parents, who recently retired. Moving in with family would have helped him with his own medical problems and allowed him to help his parents, he told the council.

Hoffman's attorney, Frank Lettenberger, presented several letters from neighbors supporting Hoffman's residency.

Lettenberger said he was shocked that Hoffman's appeal was denied because no neighbor spoke against his request.

“It makes no sense,” Lettenberger said.

Two neighbors and Hoffman's stepfather publicly supported the appeal Monday, citing Hoffman's character and desire to do good.

Lettenberger read aloud a letter from a former Walworth County detective who lives across the street from Hoffman's parents, encouraging the council to let Hoffman live within city limits.

“Instead of doing the right thing, those who voted against this did what was popular,” Lettenberger said. “If you murder a child, you can live wherever you want in the city of Elkhorn.”

Hoffman was convicted in 1989 in Jefferson County of three counts of second-degree sexual assault and two counts of bail jumping, according to Jefferson County court records.

He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to four years in prison and eight years of probation, records indicate.

He also was sentenced in April 2006 in Waukesha County to nine months in jail after a jury found him guilty of misdemeanor sex with a child age 16 or older and not guilty of three felony counts of second-degree sexual assault with an unconscious victim, according to online court records.

Hoffman left his 2006 conviction off the appeal forms, which prompted questions Monday from City Attorney Ward Phillips and Mayor Brian Olson.

Hoffman said he did not list it because he thought the Jefferson County conviction was what was keeping him from living in Elkhorn.

“Being a young man and making mistakes, that I can understand. My concern is the '06 (conviction),” Olson said.

Olson also informed the council that if it wanted to approve the appeal, it could add restrictions such as how long Hoffman could live at the address. Olson did not cast a vote.

The next step for Hoffman has yet to be determined, Lettenberger said.

He alluded to appealing the council's decision and constitutionality of the ordinance in court, which “would cost the city a lot of money down the road,” he told officials before the meeting ended.

Before the vote, Hoffman told the council he would find someplace to stay if his appeal wasn't granted. ..Source.. by Andrea Anderson

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Supreme Court upholds sex offender registration for non-sex crime

Adding OLD article.

3-19-2010 Wisconsin:

Wisconsin's Supreme Court on Friday upheld the requirement that a man convicted of a crime with no sexual component still must register as a sex offender.

James W. Smith was convicted in Brown County in 2001 of false imprisonment of a minor for making the victim ride with him while he attempted to collect a drug debt from the victim's friend. Both he and the victim were 17 at the time.

Under Wisconsin's original 1993 statute, only those convicted of first- or second-degree sexual assault were required to register. In 1996, the law was expanded to require registration by those convicted of other crimes, including kidnapping or false imprisonment of a child.

After Smith failed to register as a sex offender, he was charged with that crime in 2005, convicted and sentenced to a year in prison.

Smith appealed on the grounds that, as applied to him, the state's registry law was irrational, arbitrary and unconstitutional. The state Appeals Court upheld the requirement and the Supreme Court granted review.

Writing for the majority, Justice Annette Ziegler found that the requirement, stated clearly in the statute, is rationally related to a legitimate government interest - protecting children and assisting law enforcement. Despite its name, the sex offender registry's goal is not to identify those convicted of sexual crimes.

More than 41 other states require sex offender registration for those convicted of kidnapping or false imprisonment of a minor, even when there is no sexual element involved, according to the opinion.

Ziegler wrote that in many cases, people who kidnap children do have a sexual motivation.

In a dissent joined by Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, Justice Ann Walsh Bradley wrote that by failing to define the sex registry statute's purpose clearly, the majority abdicated its obligation to provide meaningful review. Under the majority view, Bradley wrote, anyone convicted of just about any crime should register if the broad purpose of the sex offender registry is protect the public and assist law enforcement.

The dissent notes that Smith was originally charged with taking a hostage, party to the crime, conviction of which would not have required listing on the sex offender registry. He plea-bargained down to the false imprisonment charge, and Bradley says neither the sentencing judge nor the writer of the presentence investigation contemplated that Smith would have to register as a sex offender.

"The majority holds its analysis up as 'a paradigm of judicial restraint.' To the contrary, I conclude that it has abdicated its responsibility" in examining whether the law was constitutionally applied to Smith, Bradley wrote.

The dissent found there was no rational basis for making Smith register as a sex offender. ..Source.. by Bruce Vielmetti

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Officials look to state for answers on sex offender residency

4-30-15 Wisconsin:

Richard Rosa’s brother, Raymond, is one of a number of former sex offenders facing an uncertain future because of an ordinance passed by the City of Milwaukee Common Council last fall that severely limits where individuals convicted of a sexual offense can live.

Raymond Rosa, 48, was convicted of second degree sexual assault in the case of a 15-year-old friend of his daughter in 2005. Rosa received a 12-year sentence, consisting of seven years of imprisonment and five years of extended supervision. Rosa was released in 2012 and, after failing a drug test, ended up on a list of offenders wanted by the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Department in late 2013.

At that time, Raymond had been working as an electrician’s apprentice for two or three months after some schooling through WRTP/BIG STEP, Richard said. He has, most recently, served about 15 months at Jackson Correctional Institution in Black River Falls but is set to be released at the beginning of June and is facing the prospect of living in his van.

“He called me a month and a half ago and he said, ‘Rich, they’re trying to kill me,’” Richard Rosa said, referring to the effects of the new ordinance. “He’s scared.”

The ordinance, which restricts sex offenders from maintaining a permanent residence less than 2,000 feet from a school, day care, park, recreational trail, playground or “any other place designated by the city as a place where children are known to congregate,” leaves precious few areas where sex offenders who are released from prison can legally reside on a permanent basis. The 2014 legislation came in response to similar ordinances restricting where sex offenders can live in all 18 other municipalities within Milwaukee County.

A recent panel discussion of the ordinance at the Washington Park Senior Center addressed what some called the unintended consequences of the legislation. Mayor Tom Barrett, Common Council President Michael Murphy, Wisconsin Department of Correction Region 3 Chief Niel Thoreson and Capt. James Shepard who commands the Sensitive Crimes Division of the Milwaukee Police Department, participated on the panel.

Murphy, who opposed the legislation, said he understands the concerns of some of his colleagues who felt Milwaukee was becoming a “dumping ground” for sex offenders in the county. Murphy said a 2014 analysis of DOC data by his office showed that of sex offenders living in the county in 2007, 89 percent resided in Milwaukee.

Thoreson, whose office is responsible for monitoring offenders in Milwaukee County, said this issue is not limited to the state’s largest city. Thoreson said the cities of Waukesha, Racine, Kenosha, Green Bay and Madison also shoulder the heaviest burden when it comes to housing sex offenders in their respective counties. ..Continued.. by Jabril Faraj

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Madison to consider child sex offender residency ordinance

What an absolute waste, it is well known these laws protect no one. There only purpose is to make some official look good.

3-31-15 Wisconsin:

Madison could prohibit child sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or community center under a proposal to be presented to the City Council Tuesday night.

The ordinance comes in response to community complaints over a plan to move a registered child sex offender into a building on the North Side.

The uproar started just over a week ago when Madison police distributed a flier notifying residents that the sex offender would be moving into an apartment on West Karstens Drive. Police and the state Department of Corrections held a routine informational meeting at which scores of upset parents expressed concerns about having a convicted child sex offender living in the children-dense neighborhood.

"People were very concerned about it, so I thought I would do something to protect the kids," said Ald. Anita Weier, 18th District. "I was really concerned because no one knew about it. This was a repeat sex offender of children."

Child sex offenders are already living in the community. According to the Wisconsin Sex Offender Registry, of the 24 sex offenders living within a mile of Mendota Elementary School, 18 are on the registry for offenses involving children.

A similar conversation is ongoing in the town of Cottage Grove, where 50-year-old Russell Speigle faces arson charges for allegedly setting fire to a house that Howard Nyberg, convicted in 1994 of second-degree sexual assault of a child, was slated to rent. Officials are now considering restricting where sex offenders can live in the town.

Similar restrictions exist in many municipalities, although the distances vary. In the city of New Richmond, a sex offender cannot reside within 200 feet of a facility or an area frequented by children. In Sheboygan Falls, it’s 2,000 feet, and in the town of Lac du Flambeau, it’s 3,000 feet.

"I think it would be a good rule to ensure some separation," Weier said, adding that she looked at other ordinances, but decided on 2,000 feet because Mendota Elementary is within 1,300 feet of the building the sex offender planned to move into.

"I do think it's a reasonable distance," she said.

City Attorney Michael May said the impetus behind the ordinance was not only the situation on the North Side, but also a state Court of Appeals decision in 2013 that upheld a city of South Milwaukee ordinance barring child sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school or other place frequented by children.

In that case, child sex offender Todd Kester, who lived within 1,000 feet of an elementary school, was ordered to move but refused, prompting the city to go to court to declare him a nuisance. Kester appealed, arguing that he was denied due process, among other objections. The state appeals court ruled against him.

In that case, the Wisconsin Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers argued in a friend-of-the-court brief that state law was the proper way to deal with issues involving sex offenders. The association also argued that municipal ordinances regulating sex offenders interfere with finding homes for sex offenders on supervision, increasing homelessness among them. That makes their rehabilitation more difficult and makes it more difficult for the state to track them, the defense attorneys argued.

May said that while Madison looked at other city ordinances, it did not specifically explore their experience with similar ordinance, and did not seek input from the state Department of Corrections.

The city does not currently have a limitation on where sex offenders can live, May said, only on whether certain activities can take place near children, such as those involving drugs and solicitation. ..Source.. by Jeff Glaze

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Town pushes back against sex offender residency ruling

2-22-2015 Wisconsin:

Who should determine where a sex offender can live in our community? Your town or the state? This is a real issue for our community after a court ruling said it is illegal for towns to pass residency rules against sex offenders.

The state court ruling has stopped the Town of Penfield from passing a ban on sex offenders living near schools, day cares and town parks. Now there's a State Senate bill to get the power back to the towns, but we wondered if it's a slippery slope.

Greg Kamp says, "We have to make the environment they're playing in to be a safe one."

That's why Kamp thinks residency rules ought to be up to the town. Kamp runs Penfield Little League. Earlier this year, a registered sex offender awaiting trial in Seattle moved into a home less than 200 feet from the Penfield Little League fields.

Penfield Town Supervisor Tony LaFountain says, "That raises a lot of concerns. My phone rings."

The town wrote the Child Safety Act outlawing registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of any school, daycare or town park -- including the baseball fields. However, now the state's top court says only the state can make that law. But Senator Rich Funke is sponsoring a bill so that towns like Penfield have the power.

He says, "You need to have a say at the local level."

But is a law like this a slippery slope? Could towns legislate out other groups of people they don't want?

Berkeley Brean: "Whether they're dangerous or not. If they look different, if they make less money, any number of things.

Senator Funke: "I don't believe in slippery slopes necessarily. This is a standalone issue. We're talking about sex offenders here. We're not talking about anyone else."

We looked at the bill. It specifically says restrictions for sex offenders. Kamp believes in second chances, but he also believes in boundaries especially when you have kids at the Penfield Little League fields every night of the week.

"Every Saturday and Sunday there are kids playing there," says Kamp. "I mean to me that temptation is way too great."

If you feel strongly about this you can do two things: First, contact State Senator Rich Funke's office (223-1800) and let him know what you think. Second, go to the public hearing on Penfield's Child Safety Act. It's Wednesday, March 4 at the Penfield Town Hall starting at 7 p.m. ..Source.. by Berkeley Brean

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Legislator seeks statewide sex offender placement rule

This proves, not all squirrels live in trees!

2-22-2015 Wisconsin:

Sex offender residency ordinances enacted in communities throughout Kenosha County would be replaced by a statewide residency mandate under a bill being drafted by Rep. Joel Kleefisch, R-Oconomowoc.

"I am interested in the furthest possible distance away from potential victims while maintaining a feasible placement for sex offenders to be watched," Kleefisch said. "For too long, they have been watching our children. It is time we watch them back."

It is not the first time Kleefisch has brought the idea forward. Similar bills failed in 2005 and 2010. However, this time, Kleefisch has some bi-partisan support, including that of Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

Apart from ensuring the safety of "vulnerable citizens and children," Kleefisch said the goal of the bill is to make the residency requirement consistent throughout the state.

"What is happening is municipalities are racing to make rules that are more strict than their neighboring municipality," Kleefisch said. "It makes it confusing."

Kleefisch said he is not interested in existing ordinances being grandfathered.

"This would be a pre-emptive law so the residency rule is understood statewide," he said.

Varying rules

In Kenosha County, the distance a sex offender can live from a prohibited location, such as a school, day care, park or playground, ranges from 1,200 to 6,500 feet for offenders who are not placed under Department of Corrections guidelines.

"I can see a mandate that everyone must have an ordinance," Twin Lakes Police Chief Dale Racer said, adding he doesn't see how a blanket ordinance will work for all areas.

Twin Lakes has a 1,200-foot requirement for registered sex offenders. In a larger community, this may not be restrictive enough, he said.

"For us, the way the village is situated, if we went up to 2,000 feet, it would eliminate the entire village," Racer said. "We want to restrict it, obviously. But, we can't be overly restrictive.

Finding the right distance

Kleefisch said determining the standard distance is one of the biggest challenges. A distance that is too restricting could push registered sex offenders off the grid, which would defeat the purpose.

"We want to know where they are and what they are doing," Kleefisch said. "We are working with municipal leaders, law enforcement, prosecutors and the Department of Corrections to draft a specific distance."

2,500-foot radius

Seven of the 12 Kenosha County municipalities have ordinances with a 2,500-foot radius. In most cases, the radius rules also apply to the distance registered sex offenders can live from one another.

Paris has the most expansive radius, prohibiting sex offenders from living within 6,500 feet of a prohibited location, or from one another. Pleasant Prairie and Salem are at 2,000 feet. Bristol and Twin Lakes are at 1,500 and 1,200 feet, respectively.

Ordinances throughout Kenosha County also generally allow registered offenders to live within a closer radius to prohibited locations if they are placed under DOC guidelines. In this case, 500 feet is typical.

Paddock Lake Administrator Tim Popanda said when he heard a statewide restriction of 2,000 feet might be considered, he immediately looked to see if the village would be affected.

"The 500-foot difference would not change anything here," Popanda said. "(Registered sex offenders) can live in the same three areas whether it is 2,500 or 2,000."

Kleefisch said he hopes to have the bill drafted by April.

Sex offender restrictions

All municipalities in Kenosha County have ordinances that restrict where sex offenders can reside.

Ordinances vary widely and include some exceptions. However, all include a prohibited distance from schools, parks, trails, playgrounds and other places where children are known to congregate.

Radius restrictions in Kenosha County:

— Kenosha: 2,500 feet if not placed in compliance with Department of Corrections guidelines; 500 feet if placed in compliance with DOC guidelines; not within a six-block radius of another registered sex offender.

— Bristol: 1,500 feet from prohibited location.

— Paddock Lake: 2,500 feet from prohibited location if not placed in compliance with Department of Corrections guidelines; 500 feet if placed in compliance with DOC guidelines; 2,500 feet from another registered sex offender.

— Pleasant Prairie: 2,000 feet from prohibited location.

— Silver Lake: 2,500 feet from prohibited location if not placed in compliance with Department of Corrections guidelines; 500 feet if placed under DOC guidelines; 2,500 feet from another registered sex offender.

— Twin Lakes: 1,200 feet from prohibited location; not permitted at all if offender was not domiciled in Twin Lakes prior to conviction.

— Brighton: 2,500 feet from prohibited location if not placed in compliance with Department of Corrections guidelines; 500 feet if placed under DOC guidelines; 2,500 feet from another registered sex offender.

— Paris: 6,500 feet from prohibited location if not placed in compliance with Department of Corrections guidelines; 500 feet if placed in compliance under DOC guidelines; 6,500 feet from another registered sex offender.

— Randall: 2,500 feet from prohibited location.

— Salem: 2,000 feet from prohibited location; not permitted at all if convicted of a violent crime against children unless the offender was domiciled in Salem prior to the conviction.

— Somers: 2,500 feet from prohibited location if not placed in compliance with Department of Corrections guidelines; 500 feet if placed under DOC guidelines; 2,500 feet from another registered sex offender.

— Wheatland: 2,500 feet from prohibited location if not placed in compliance with Wisconsin Department of Corrections guidelines; 500 feet if placed under DOC guidelines; 2,500 feet from another registered sex offender.. ..Source.. by JILL TATGE-ROZELL

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Swapping nude images spells trouble for teens

2-22-2015 Wisconsin:

Police in Rhinelander have long been aware that "sexting" — sending sexually explicit photos or text messages — is popular with teenagers.

But until November, when the mother of a Rhinelander High School student turned over a nude image of one of her son's classmates that she found on his cell phone, law enforcement officials had no idea the problem was so pervasive. That single image led police to identify dozens of students, all of whom had been trading explicit images with one another on a regular basis.

"It was overwhelming how many kids were involved," said Oneida County Sheriff's Lt. Terri Hook.

Most of the photos were "selfies," private photos that were taken and sent to a boyfriend or girlfriend. Many were forwarded on to friends or posted on social media sites both locally and around the country. In all, hundreds of photos snaked their way through the school; some wound up in the hands of people several states away, police said.

More than 40 students were involved in distributing teen pornography, police said. Few understood that just having the photos in their possession could have landed them in prison — and on the sex offender registry for life.

"For most of these kids, it didn't even seem like a big deal to them. It was just something they did, something they thought everybody did," Hook said.

When the investigation was over, Oneida County officials declined to prosecute. Instead, students and parents attended informational sessions meant to stop the behavior from happening again.

"We could have kept on investigating. We could have, I'm sure, found much more," Hook said. "We stopped, because what was really clear to us was that we had a problem."

The situation in Rhinelander is not uncommon in Wisconsin.

Many teens send sexually explicit photos on their cell phones believing the image will stay private, police and prosecutors say. Yet increasingly, the images are finding their way into the hands of sexual predators, and the teens themselves can be faced with harsh, lifelong penalties for their behavior.

Of the more than 130 million images containing child pornography examined since 2002 by the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, one in four were initially posted by minors themselves, said John Sheehan, executive director of the organization.

Grave consequences, serious risks

For teens, the consequences of sexting can go well beyond the humiliation of appearing naked on every cell phone in math class. A single image can easily jeopardize a job search or quickly torpedo a college application. ..Continued.. by Shereen Siewert

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...