Law Targeting International Sex Trafficking Moves Forward in U.S. House

While I have no problem with a law that targets sex trafficking, this law places the blame for sex trafficking on everyone on the U.S. registry. i.e., even Romeo and Juliet cases, juveniles, and those who pee in the park. This is an over-broad law and needs to be stopped. All RSOs and their families need to be contacting their representatives in Congress telling them to VOTE NO on this bill! See my review of this bill HERE.

4-28-2010 Washington DC:

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 28, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The battle against international sex-trafficking took a new step forward Wednesday after the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs approved legislation that would establish an international database of registered sex offenders and traffickers – an international version of the U.S. “Megan’s Law” – which its sponsors say would greatly assist authorities worldwide in preventing the exploitation of children by international sex tourists.

The measure, sponsored by U.S. Congressman Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican, is called “the International Megan’s Law of 2010” and would establish mandatory reporting requirements for convicted sex traffickers and registered sex offenders against children who intend to travel overseas.

The House committee cleared the legislation to go to the floor of the full U.S. House of Representatives in a unanimous voice vote.

Currently the fight against keeping sex predators from exploiting children abroad depends on cooperation between national governments and international police agencies, such as between Interpol and U.S. border and customs officers.

But Smith, a longtime human rights leader and author of anti human-trafficking legislation in 2000, 2003 and 2005, said international cooperation is largely “ad hoc” and leaves wide gaps for sexual offenders to travel to and from international destinations largely unnoticed and anonymous. Despite the “sincere effort” of U.S. and foreign agencies, Smith said that international sharing of information about travelling child sex predators only happens occasionally.

“A legal structure is needed to systematize notification efforts and ultimately protect as many children as possible," he said.

The prime model for the legislation is the U.S. Megan’s law, which was passed in 1996 in order to respond to the problem of convicted sexual predators changing their address or even moving across state lines where state and local authorities would have no knowledge of their danger to children and society. The law is named after a New Jersey girl, Megan Nicole Kanka, who was kidnapped, raped, and murdered in 1994 by a convicted sex offender who lived right across the street.

The proposed bill takes specific aim at child sex tourism. Smith’s proposed law would require that the United States provide advance notice of a “high risk” individual’s intended travel to the government authorities of their destination, and would request foreign governments to notify the United States when individuals with known records of sexually preying upon minors seek to enter the United States.

If approved by Congress, the International Megan’s Law would establish a sex offender travel notification system for U.S. authorities on the look-out for sex offenders intending international travel to and from the United States, non-public sex offender registries in U.S. embassies to keep critical information on U.S. sex predators living abroad, and would provide the U.S. Secretary of State with the ability to revoke or severely restrict the passport of an individual convicted overseas of a sex crime against a minor.

The proposed bill would also require the Secretary of State to issue a report on how international cooperation between governments is progressing on child sex offender travel, and would also provide financial assistance to other countries to help them establish systems to identify and report child sex offenders to U.S. authorities.

According to the International Labour Organization, approximately 1.8 million children all over the world suffer exploitation through the commercial sex trade, a figure referenced by Foreign Affairs Chairman Howard Berman (D-Calif.), who strongly endorsed the bill during its Wednesday committee mark-up.

"We all know the devastating emotional, physical, and psychological effects on these child victims," he said. "We need to do all we can to prevent these predators from circumventing U.S. laws to prey on children in foreign countries.”

Berman urged his colleagues in the House on both sides of the aisle to support the bill, which is expected to come before the full House before the summer recess. ..Source.. Peter J. Smith

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

As "Megan's Law" turns 15, are we any safer?

3-26-2010 New Jersey:

New Jersey is currently out of compliance with its own land mark sex offender law, named after slain Hamilton girl, Megan Kanka. Why did this happen?

WHAT HAPPENED TO MEGAN?

It was a warm afternoon in late July, 1994, when a seven-year-old girl named Megan Kanka was beckoned across the street by her neighbor, a 33-year-old man named Jesse Timmendequas. He asked her if she wanted to see his new puppy. Once she was inside his house, he raped her then slammed her head into a dresser, strangled her to death with a belt, then put two plastic bags over her head to prevent blood from getting on the carpet and raped her again. Finally he shoved her body into a toy box and dumped it next to a portable toilet in Mercer County Park.

The murder-rape of Megan Kanka inspired local and national outrage that ultimately lead to the creation of "Megan's Law." The law requires that a database of registered sex offenders be maintained and that when a dangerous sex offender moves into a community, its residents be informed. In 1996, then President Bill Clinton passed a federal law that required every state to follow New Jersey's lead.

Fifteen years later, New Jersey, like many states, is out of compliance with its own law. The problems are many: maintaining the sex offender registry and notification system is expensive, trying to find locations for sex offenders to live is increasingly difficult, many psychologists who specialize in sexual behavior believe that many sexual offenders are not able to change, and the premise of the law -that informing people of danger will help them keep safe- has been criticized by legal experts and law enforcement officials alike.

HOW DOES THE LAW WORK?

"Megan's Law" sorts sex offenders into three different tiers. After psychological evaluation, a judge assigns offenders into a tier. Tier one determines that the sex offender is at low risk to re-offend, tier two determines that they are at moderate risk to society and tier three include those individuals who are assessed as being a high risk to society.

The information available on the registry website .... includes a photo, the name of the sex offender, any aliases the offender has used, descriptions of marks such as tattoos and scars, description of the vehicle used by the offender and its license plate number, the offender's current address and the nature of offense including victim's age at time of offense.

Maureen Kanka, Megan's mother, in a recent interview with the VOICE stated that the picture is a great element of the registry. "Parents can sit down with their children and show them the picture of who the offender is, to better help protect their children," Kanka says.

On the New Jersey registry website, however, some images are out of date by as much as two years. This can be aproblem as sex offenders can lose or gain weight, change their hair style, or otherwise modify their appearance.

The registry lists offenders who have committed a sex related crime against an adult, molested a child or been found not guilty for reason of insanity. However, the registry does not list every person who has ever committed a sexual crime, including some juvenile offenders.

Once individuals are classified, the prosecutor's office starts the notification process based on the risk assessment. In the case of moderate to high-risk offenders, the prosecutor's office notifies the public by posting information on the state's Internet registry. In addition, law enforcement officials go door to door and post flyers to let people know that a sex offender is moving into their area.

WHAT ARE THE COSTS?

Beyond questions of whether "Megan's Law" protects citizens or not, there is no doubt that it is expensive to carry out. Furthermore, the costs of compliance far outweigh the penalties for being out of compliance.

According to JusticePolicy.org and a recent press release by David T. Schlendorf Law offices, "New Jersey's first-year outlay of $14,088,206 would vastly exceed the $516,071 it stands to lose [in federal funds] if it fails to implement" current sex offender registry and notification laws.

A 2008 study conducted by Rutgers University and The New Jersey Department of Corrections, through a grant from the National Institute of Justice, found that "The cost for Megan's Law implementation during calendar year 2006 was estimated to be $1,557,978 [per county], whereas implementation costs during calendar year 2007 totaled $3,973,932 for responding counties. This change represents a 155 percent increase in ongoing expenses from calendar year 2006 to calendar year 2007." The report concluded that the sudden increase was likely linked to the new use of Global Positioning Satellites for the most dangerous offenders and the increased costs of surveillance.

Currently New Jersey is facing an $11 billion deficit on a $33 billion budget and Governor Christie is making up the difference without increasing taxes, a position he campaigned on. The result has been a long list of budget cuts. College tuition assistance has been slashed, while prescription drug fees for seniors has been doubled. In such an economic climate, it is perhaps not surprising that the state would choose to remain out of compliance with costly sex offender laws.

CAN THE LAW BE ENFORCED

Even if Governor Christie was able to find the funds to bring New Jersey back into compliance with "Megan's Law," a growing body of evidence suggests it is difficult for the police to ensure total enforcement of the law.

The logistical complications of enacting sex offender notification and registry laws have been highlighted in recent weeks through a series of incidents in California which operates under a variation of "Megan's Law" known as "Jessica's Law." The law is named after a nine-year-old girl from Florida who was raped and then buried alive by her 47-year-old neighbor, John Couey, in 2005.

According to an article by Gerry Shih in the New York Times on March 6, 2010, a California sex offender named James F. Donnelly moved into a house directly across the street from Wildwood Elementary School in Piedmont, directly violating the terms of "Jessica's Law." Parents complained to local law enforcement, but the Police Chief, John Hunt, was informed by the Alameda County district attorney and the California attorney general that there were no provisions in "Jessica's Law" for removing or punishing Donnelly.

Shih's article notes that, "For Mr. Donnelly's housing decision to be considered a violation of state law, 'there has to be a punishment attached,'" according to Nancy O'Malley, the Alameda County district attorney. She went on to say that "Jessica's Law never assigned a punishment."

Shih quotes Police Chief Hunt as saying: "I was amazed. You have this law that was overwhelmingly voted in and determined to be constitutional, and then you find out there's no bite to it. It's all bark and no bite."

In some situations, Donnelly's actions could amount to a parole violation and land him back in jail, but as the Rutgers University 2008 study points out, "Only 32 percent of [sex] offenders were paroled whereas 68 percent maxed out, leaving the prison with no post-incarceration supervision requirements other than those imposed by Megan's Law." When offenders are not on parole they must register and keep their address information up to date, but in many states there is no punishment for offenders who simply move into restricted areas. "Megan's Law" is primarily concerned with providing information, not punishment.

A recent report conducted by Administrative Offices of the Court shows that as of June 2009 in the state of New Jersey, 5,102 individuals failed to register with local police.

Maureen Kanka says she thinks there needs to be better education of judges and better enforcement of the law. "Too many times I hear that an offender will fail to register, and once they catch him they will slap him on the hand," Kanka says.

IS KNOWING ENOUGH?

"The premise of passing 'Megan's Law' was to bring awareness to families about potential danger living in their community," said Megan's mother, Maureen Kanka, in a recent interview with The College VOICE. Mrs. Kanka, still a Hamilton resident, maintains that if she had known that Timmendequas and two other convicted sex offenders were living right across the street, she would have been able to warn her daughter and protect her from harm. But is knowing enough?

In an article entitled "Would 'Megan's Law' Have Saved Megan?" published in the New Jersey Law Journal on July 8, 1996, senior reporter Tim O'Brien writes that "In fact, interviews and a police report make clear that neighbors living within at least eight houses of the Cifelli house [where Timmendequas lived] were aware that [Joseph Cefelli] was a convicted sex offender. Those interviewed also all knew specifics of the charges against him."

O'Brien goes on to suggest that even the Kankas may have known about Cifelli, if not about Cefelli's housemate, Timmendequas. O'Brien writes, "four neighbors say they believe that the Kankas --of 32 Barbara Lee Drive [in Hamilton, N.J.]-- also knew that Cifelli, who lived diagonally across the street from them, was a convicted sex offender."

Obrien quotes David Rocha, who was an American Civil Liberties Union -NJ staff attorney at that time, saying that "the disclosure that neighbors had some knowledge underscores the 'fallacy of the law, which seems to be premised on two choices, either you drive the offenders out, or you hide your children as prisoners in their own home.'" Rocha goes on to say that "In reality, after a time people will go about living their lives, and will behave or respond in a variety of ways. But laws should be structured to set a social policy or solve a societal problem. Laws can't solve individual problems, and policies shouldn't be based on anecdote."

Maureen Kanka insists that O'Brien got it wrong and she is certain that "Megan's Law" has saved lives. She says, "I have received e-mails over the years from people whose children have been affiliated with sex offenders and before the legislation was passed they had no idea there was a problem with them."

Mrs. Kanka's view that having access to information may change the way citizens behave is supported by substantial evidence. Victoria Beck, Ph.D. led a group of researchers who published a series of articles in The Journal of Psychiatry & Law that showed when a community is notified of a sexual offender's presence in their neighborhood, their fear of victimization increases as does their likelihood of taking some self-protective measures, such as buying a dog or firearm or installing alarm system. But the same research indicates these behaviors have no impact on whether or not offenders reoffend.

A research study in Washington state that examined the behavior of sexual offenders released prior to the enactment of registry and notification laws, and those released after the laws went into effect also showed no difference in recidivism rates, but did find that new offenses were detected more quickly once they had been committed.

Sgt. William P. Bastedo who is currently in charge of the "Megan's Law" unit of the West Windsor Township police, says that the law is valuable to law enforcers, because "We know who the offenders are and where they are located." Knowing who to talk to when a child goes missing or is found dead, however, does not appear to be the original intent of "Megan's Law" and may not be what community members expect it to offer.

WILL SEX OFFENDERS DO IT AGAIN?

The Rutgers University and New Jersey Department of Corrections study published in 2008 revealed that "Megan's Law" did nothing to reduce rates of recidivism among sex offenders, but the report notes that "New Jersey, as a whole, has experienced a consistent downward trend of sexual offense rates."

The average sentence served by sex offenders is five years. Forty-six percent of those released are re-arrested (9 percent are re-arrested for a sex crime) and the average length of time to re-arrest is two years.

Louis B. Schlesinger, a professor of psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City, told The College Voice in a recent phone interview that, "Treatment will not change an offender's sexual arousal pattern," but that it may help some offenders "gain control" over their behavior.
In his 2003 book "Sexual Murder: Catathymic and Compulsive Homicides" Schlesinger seeks to differentiate the various types of sexual murders, pointing out that not all murders that appear sexually motivated are and vice versa.

A survey of Mercer students shows that while few are aware of "Megan's Law," 40 percent believe that treatment is ineffective for sexual offenders. Research suggests this may be true for sociopathic offenders and killers like Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer, but is not necessarily the case for all sexual offenders, including the 54 percent who do not re-offend as described in the Rutgers report.

Of those sexual offenders who do recidivate, however, data suggests that sexual registry and notification laws may make them even more likely to seek contact with children simply as a result of being ostracized by the adult community.

According to Richard Tewskbury in his 2005 article "Collateral Consequences of Sex Offender Registration" from the Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, a significant minority of registered sexual offenders, no matter what their likelihood for recidivism, suffer from social stigmatization, loss of relationships, and verbal and physical assaults.

Tewskbury also found that a majority of sex offenders reported negative consequences, such as exclusion from residences, threats and harassment, emotional harm to their family members, social exclusion by neighbors, and loss of employment.

"The less stable someone is, it is more likely that they will commit an offense and not qualify to come off of Megan's list" says local public defense attorney Christopher Duffy.

CAN THEY GET OFF THE LIST?

The fact that "Megan's Law" turns 15 this year is particularly significant because one of the provisions of the law allows offenders to petition to have their name removed after 15 years on the list.

Local Public Defense Attorney Michael Buncher said in an interview with The College Voice that so far he has worked with ten registered sex offenders who have sought to have their names removed from the registry. Three of his clients have been denied, but six have been successful. One of Buncher's cases is still pending.

Only certain people qualify to have their names removed from the registry. "Convictions such as sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault and offense to more than one victim or more than one offense, automatically qualifies an offender for being on the list for a lifetime, regardless of the tier they were placed on," says Buncher.

Public defense attorney Duffy states that the group most successful in having their names removed are those who committed their offense as juveniles. Yet even for low risk offenders, he adds, "It is possible that someone on tier one may not qualify for name removal."

Human Rights Watch released a statement saying that "Megan's Law" is too broad and that the duration of time spent on the registry is too long. They note that juveniles who are registered under "Megan's Law" may pose little or no risk of recidivism and the scrutiny of the law may leave them less stable and less able to function within the community. ..Source.. Daniela Rocha

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Why Megan's Law Is Getting An F

12-7-2009 National:

It seems like, every day, there's a story about a child abused by a convicted sex offender, even though there's a federal law that is supposed to keep track of them.

So is there something wrong with Megan's Law?

The Early Show takes a closer look this week in a special series called "Broken Promise." Correspondent Tracy Smith offers the details.

Megan's Law was written with the best of intentions, but a growing body of evidence suggests it may not be living up to its promise.

Megan's law promise as it were was to do one thing, provide the public with the names of former sex offenders living in communities, it didn't even promise to provide addresses this came later. Then, as now, ALL the Megans' laws are, is, a telephone book of names and addresses which show where former offenders (registrants) SLEEP for a few hours of the day. It does not and never intended to show where former offenders are the rest of the day. Far too many people READ-INTO the law OTHER-PROMISES which come from what they think the law should provide. Megans' laws cannot be anything more than a glorified telephone book with pictures.

Mark Lunsford rarely comes home these days.

"I'm just not here," he says. "I'm either at work or I'm out. I don't come home anymore."

The murder of his daughter, 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford, haunts him. Her alleged killer, John Couie, a registered sex offender arrested 24 times, lived right next door to their Florida home.

Lunsford says he believed he lived in a safe neighborhood.

Mark Lundsford didn't even live in the same home as his daughter when she was abducted, he lived with his girlfriend several miles away!

He says, "Maybe a lot of us are just ignorant to it, not knowing that it could happen to any of us."

Six weeks after Jessica was killed, the body of Sarah Lunde, 13, was found. The cops believe she was choked to death by her mother's old boyfriend, also a registered sex offender, also in Florida.

These two horrifying murders direct the public's attention, once again, to the broken promise of Megan's Law.

Asked if Megan's Law worked in the Lunsford case, Florida Citrus County Sheriff Jeff Dawsey says, "Apparently, this guy went undetected into the community. Nobody knew that he was there."

Right here is the falacy of Megan's law: The law shows where an registrant SLEEPS for a few hours of the day, it does not show where the registrant is the rest of the time. During non-sleeping hours a registrant can walk, travel etc. whereever they wish and do so UNDETECTED. Sheriff Dawsey misleads the public with his comment by ignoring the limits of Megan's law (covers SLEEPING HOURS only). Technically ALL REGISTRANTS are UNREGISTERED during non-sleeping hours! The law is nothing more then a harmful joke played on the public by politicians who use it for personal gratification and getting votes to keep them in office.

Megan's Law was named for 7-year-old Megan Kanka, brutally murdered in 1994 by a two-time sex offender who lived directly across the street.

The law requires states to register convicted sex offenders and to notify neighborhoods when offenders move in.

Laura Ahearn says, "The spirit of Megan's Law is, that if a predator moves in next door to you, you will be notified. That's just not the case." Ahearn runs Parents For Megan's Law , a watchdog group that examines how strictly states adhere to the law. She notes, "We did a 50-state survey and what I found is that across the country, most states are failing, so I would give Megan's Law an F."

Ironically, Florida, the home of Jessica Lunsford and Sarah Lunde, received an A+ for its tough guidelines, and still offenders easily got around the law.

Registrants (including John Couey) did not -get around the law- the law cannot control a person's every move, which is the inherent falacy of Megan's law. People choose to SLEEP whenever they wish, most folks have different SLEEPING hours, the law cannot say when a person is to sleep. Therefore, abductions or other crimes can occur at any hour of the day or night, by those registered and by anyone else from the community.

Ahearn says, "We have two tragedies in Florida that demonstrate that Megan's Law is certainly not enough. ..Source.. by CBS News.com

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

NJ- Secaucus law sex offenders voided

One way to interpret this ruling is, since initilly Megan's law merely required the publishing of name and address, is everything beyond that, also illegal? Think about that....

5-17-2009 New Jersey:

Supreme Court rules Megan’s Law is enough

The New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled that a 1994 state law to protect children from sex offenders is sufficient and that stricter municipal laws are unnecessary. The decision voids at least 120 municipal laws across New Jersey, including one in Secaucus, which restricted where sex offenders can live.

Under the Secaucus ordinance, first passed in 1995 and amended in 2005, sex offenders were barred from living within 2,500 feet of a school, park, playground, or daycare center.

Secaucus was not alone in limiting where sex offenders could live. Similar ordinances were passed throughout the state, with some towns also banning offenders from living near places of worship. In small municipalities, sex offenders were essentially barred from living in the town completely because there were so many places they could not live near.

The court ruling, handed down on May 7, now jeopardizes the future of offender residency restrictions.

Laws stemmed from landmark case

The municipal laws were intended to strengthen Megan’s Law, the landmark 1994 New Jersey law that requires sex offenders to register with local police after being released from prison. Offenders are required to give police their address, Social Security number, offender classification, a photo, details of the crimes, the ages of their victims, and other pertinent information.

Some of this information is then made available to the public online or at local police stations.

The law was passed after the murder of 7-year-old Megan Kanka of Hamilton, N.J. Kanka was kidnapped, raped, and killed by a neighbor, Jesse Timmendequas, a repeat sex offender who had been released from prison. After New Jersey passed the original Megan’s Law other states enacted their own versions of the law. There is also a national Megan’s Law.

Children’s and victim’s rights groups believed, however, that Megan’s Law didn’t go far enough to protect kids from predators, and began lobbying municipal governments to place further restrictions on sex offenders.

Case fought on behalf of college student

The Supreme Court ruling was unanimous, 6-0. While it voids the town ordinances, it has no impact on Megan’s Law itself, which remains in effect.

The decision stems from G.H. v. Galloway Township, a case filed in 2007 by Frank Corrado, a cooperating attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey. Corrado argued that municipalities had overreached their authority by enacting these ordinances.

“These laws were adopted with the best of intentions,” Corrado said. “But they’re ineffective because they tend to either force [offenders] to go underground, meaning people don’t register with local authorities, or they make it impossible for them to live in supportive environments that can help them lead productive lives within the bounds of the law. So they end up actually being counterproductive.”

The case was filed on behalf of G.H., now a senior at Richard Stockton College in Galloway, N.J. When G.H. was 15, he was caught having sexual relations with a 13-year-old girl and was convicted as a minor for improper sexual contact. Years later, after enrolling in college, police told G.H. that Galloway’s predator ordinance banned him from campus.

“One of the problems with these municipal ordinances is that they make no differentiation between Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III offenders,” Corrado said. “So even if you are the lowest level of offender, you’re still covered without regard for the risk of recidivism.”

Tier III offenders are considered to be the most dangerous predators who are most likely to reoffend, while Tier I offenders are considered the least dangerous. Under the state Megan’s Law, G.H. is classified as a Tier I offender and is not subject to lifetime parole like most sex offenders.

Looking to legislature

Local government leaders who still want tougher residency restrictions may now turn their attention to the state legislature.

“It’s too premature to comment fully on the decision,” said Town Attorney David Drumeler last week. “We’ll need to analyze what the Supreme Court said. My hope is the legislature will put something together that essentially says Megan’s Law is the floor and anything municipalities want to enact in addition to that is permissible.” ..News Source.. by E. Assata Wright

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

AL- Some question justice of sex offender laws

The legislature speaks with forked tongue, they establish multiple sex offense laws and punishments -and other crime types as well-, such is proof of the belief in "principle of proportionality," every state follows same as does federal law. Then comes sex offender registration laws and collateral laws that flow from it, where did the principle of proportionality go?

2-2-2009 Alabama:

Although Troy King’s Community Notification Act passed unchallenged in the Alabama Legislature in 2005, even proponents of the law admit that it is not problem-free.

The law states, “The Legislature declares that its intent in imposing certain registration and reporting requirements on criminal sex offenders is to protect the public … and not to further punish such offenders.”

But the public is not given the whole story, according to Kyla Kelim, cooperating attorney with the ACLU of Alabama. Kelim has worked extensively on cases dealing with the Community Notification Act and is an advocate for non-violent offenders who feel victimized by this law.

“The public has this perception that they’re being protected from predators. They’re being told these people are dangerous,” she said.

Kelim said non-predatory offenders should not be subject to the same stringent consequences as a violent rapist or child molester, as they are under this law.
Offenders charged with rape in the second degree, or statutory rape, “get lumped in with the worst of the worst. This is not just one grade of crime where they’re all just terrible people who deserve to be locked away from society, but that’s how they’re treated,” she said. “They are trying to get every sex offender in the state to leave. They don’t care if they have to go to the moon, but they don’t want them here.”

Some second-degree rape charges result from modern day Romeo and Juliet romances.

According to Capt. James Majors with the Lee County Sheriff’s Office, for a minority of offenders, “All they were guilty of is being in love.” But he says, “The law is an umbrella and everyone falls under it.”

There are, according to Kelim, casualties of this law. “Most of the time rape second’ comes out because the girl gets pregnant. So it’s got unintended victims. The offenders can’t get married. The father can’t support his child because he can’t get a good job. They’re always going to live in the fringes of society. Even if they do get married, you’re then consigning that woman and child to live in a trailer park surrounded by real predators and fearing for their safety,” Kelim said.
“One of the biggest problems with the law is that it gives the public a false sense of security,” said Kelim. She explained that sometimes fliers delivered to neighbors of sex offenders don’t have accurate information.

According to Valley City Administrator Tim Bryan, a firm advocate of the law, the notification act has one definite safety deficiency. When a sexual offender moves into a new residence, law enforcement agencies are required to notify all those who reside in the vicinity of the offender, but if the houses surrounding the sex offender change ownership, there is no system in place to notify the new owners. Sellers may not want to disclose information that a sex offender lives next door, as it may negatively impact the value of their house.

Another safety concern, according to Majors, is that there are no laws to stop a man prohibited from residing with a minor from staying at his girlfriend’s house all day, as long as he sleeps at his own residence. And this girlfriend may have kids or live near a school.
Kelim is not opposed to the law in all cases, just its non-discriminatory nature. She stressed that she doesn’t want predatory offenders to roam unmonitored, without regulations.

“I believe that if you’re truly dangerous, I want to know where you are. I’d really like to know where the people who break into houses are, or murderers, whether they live next door,” she said.

Majors, whose job it is to register offenders in Lee County, agreed that certain offenders need to stay on law enforcement’s radar. “There are some sex offenders I feel that we need to know where they are all the time. There are others … we don’t have to be concerned with,” he said.

Kelim said tracking non-violent offenders takes law enforcement’s time and resources away from the truly dangerous offenders, predators that warrant locking your doors at night, those from whom you hide your children.

Kelim didn’t deny that many of the non-violent offenders were guilty of “colossal stupidity and capital immaturity” but, while stressing her fierce protectiveness of her young children, she said, “There are people that I represent that I would leave my kids with. I know for a fact they’re not a danger to anybody.”

Kelim says one of the most obvious constitutional violations of the law is that offenders who may not be a danger to society have few or no options. She said there is no mechanism for a convicted offender to go into court and prove that he or she is not a danger to society. Poor offenders, who are the vast majority, are especially helpless. They are denied their due process, and hiring an attorney is their only recourse. But that is costly, and often they simply remain ashamed and unheard.

“I’ve had legislators whose family members have gotten into trouble who couldn’t believe that they voted for this and couldn’t believe that this is what it meant,” Kelim said.

The Supreme Court dismissed cases challenging the constitutionality of the act, saying that these strict requirements for offenders are not a punishment.

There are some who disagree with the Supreme Court’s assessment, including those whose lives are directly impacted by this umbrella law.
“Nobody has put a case together to go up to the Supreme Court and show that this law is a fundamental restraint on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” Kelim said.

Opelika resident Michael Joseph Grody said he was 26 when he was arrested for having consensual intercourse with a 15-year-old girl. His crime is posted on the National Sex Offender Registry as sexual abuse in the third degree, a misdemeanor in Oregon. Grody spent 30 days in jail. “The girl told me she was 18… She looked older,” he said.

According to Grody, in Oregon, where he was convicted, he would have been required to register for 10 years. But when he moved back to his home state of Alabama, he realized that he had to register for the rest of his life. Grody insists that he is not a danger to anyone.

“I’m a good ol’ country boy … A sex offender is someone who hides out in the woods and rapes little girls,” he said.

For Grody, perhaps, jail sentence served, lesson learned. “I won’t ever do it again,” he said. Still, every day he lives with the consequences of that mistake.
Kelim said with information so accessible to the public, sexual offenders have been killed by mobs, their houses burned, their cars firebombed, they’ve committed suicide.
Majors said “some landlords who allow sex offenders as their tenants get harassed, get hate mail. Some offenders get their mailboxes torn down, stuff thrown in their yards.”

Grody said his truck was egged and he has been harassed over the CB radio at work. “It’s very embarrassing,” he said.

“I don’t think that anyone can look at the specific unintended consequences of this act (Community Notification Act) and say that it’s fair or that anyone has thought about it,” Kelim said.

She warned that the law is “setting up a class of professional criminals. We try to help our citizens in the worst of times and to provide resources for them to be able to recover and reintegrate into society, but this is one group of citizens that isn’t permitted to do that.

“Is it a good idea to take people who genuinely may want to go back to society, right their wrongs after they’ve served their sentences, and to put them in a position where they literally have no way to exist without resorting to crime? Doesn’t that make them more dangerous? To ostracize them?” she asked.

With this law, ideas of rehabilitation have virtually disappeared, Kelin said.

“There are no treatment programs for sex offenders in prison, zero,” Kelim said.

“They have touted questionable studies that say sexual offenders cannot be rehabilitated. We got the attorney general of the state of Alabama to agree in writing, in a stipulation, that there are no meaningful studies that say anything about the recidivism rate one way or the other. Why would you give up on a group of people without any reason?” she questioned.

When asked about ordinances across the country similar to the one in Valley, which require sex offenders, even juvenile offenders, to put signs in their yards on Halloween, Kelim replied, “Somewhere along the way hysteria is replacing common sense. Whipping the crowds into hysteria about sex offenders for the sake of political expediency is wrong. Elected officials make laws more restrictive because everyone hates sex offenders. It’s convenient to beat up on them. They have no advocates. They have no voice. This is a politically powerless group of people.

“Who’s going to vote against harsher treatment for sex offenders? Who is going to stand up and say they deserve rights?”

After a pause, Kelim answered her own rhetorical questions: “No one.” ..News Source.. by Emily Edge, Staff Writer

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Editorial: Fine-Tuning Megan’s Law

Note: Additional highlighting and links to proof that what the editorial mentions is being underestimated as there are hundreds of cases of recorded vigilantism and even murders of registered sex offenders resulting from these laws. That which is recorded does not reflect the thousands of subtle personal acts of prejudice and biases inflicted throughout society. eAdvocate

7-30-2008 National:

Megan’s Law, which requires public notification when a convicted sex offender moves into a community, is named for Megan Kanka, a 7-year-old New Jersey girl who was killed by a released sex offender near her home in Hamilton Township in 1994. However useful, the law has always carried great potential for danger, and now a New Jersey court has taken a step toward making it a more sophisticated instrument of public safety.

One danger has always been vigilantism (and even murders) See Note above. Child molesters living peaceably in a community after serving their time — and even some people mistaken for child molesters — have been beaten up or fired upon.

A disturbing new development is the proliferation of local ordinances that go beyond the reporting requirements of legislation like Megan’s Law by restricting where sex offenders may live. In some New Jersey towns, offenders cannot live within 2,500 feet of a school or playground. Often, the banned areas are so large as to effectively prohibit a sex offender from living anywhere in town.

These bans can do more harm than good. They will not deter a determined predator. Many law enforcement officials, including parole officers, have observed that they tend to bunch sex offenders in drug-infested, rundown neighborhoods that are poorly suited for anyone trying to turn around a life.

Two weeks ago, in a unanimous decision, a New Jersey appeals court ruled that such ordinances conflicted with the state’s Megan’s Law because they interfered with the broad discretion given to parole officers to decide where a sex offender may live. By arbitrarily ruling out certain areas, the judges suggested, the ordinances could deny offenders access to public transportation, treatment programs and employment.

Several state legislators now say they will try to amend the law to allow for residency limits. The courts in New York have upheld such bans and other states, including Oklahoma and Iowa, have adopted them.

There’s no reason for New Jersey to make the same mistake. We have long supported the registration requirement. But we also believe that officials should be aware that in the wrong hands, this information can lead to harassment or worse. And the decision about where a sex offender should live properly resides with law enforcement agencies. ..News Source.. Editorial NY Times

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Is Megan’s Law working?

12-9-2007 Pennsylvania:

Megan's Law, designed to notify the public about sex offenders living in their midst, has proved to be immensely popular.

In surveys, most people say they want to know if a convicted sex offender is living near them. Many law enforcement officials believe the law is keeping communities safer.

But few studies have been done on the topic. Some say the law only serves to ostracize and isolate ex-convicts, leading them back into trouble and making communities less safe.

One Lancaster County man says the law which trumpets his name over the Internet is partly to blame for his return to jail, because it isolated him, even after he had paid his debt to society. He is back in jail not for another sex crime but because he broke parole by drinking.

In 1995, the man was charged with sexually assaulting a woman in East Pennsboro Twp. at gunpoint, according to court documents.

The man pleaded no contest to unlawful restraint and attempted aggravated indecent assault and served seven years in prison. Since then, he said in written comments, he has been in therapy and has not offended again. He communicated with The Patriot-News on the condition that his name not be used, saying he wants to protect his family.

He argues that Megan's Law makes communities less safe, not more. Public access "drives the offender back into the very shadows that are a part of the offending behavior ... causing them to "deteriorate mentally, emotionally and spiritually," he wrote.

Law enforcement officials and advocates for crime victims express little sympathy. Capt. Janet McNeal, former Megan's Law coordinator for the Pennsylvania State Police, says the law "prevents a lot of victimization." Jennifer Storm, director of the Victims Advocate office for Dauphin County, calls it "an excellent law" and says she believes "the more informed the public is, the safer we are."

Nils Fredericksen, spokesman for state Attorney General Tom Corbett, says the system is "doing what lawmakers intended" and should be "upgraded and expanded."

But a 2007 study in New Jersey showed sex attacks on children were declining even before the law took effect. According to the study's consultant, Philip Witt, "We don't know whether Megan's Laws really work ... I believe they have very little effect."

Many states and municipalities restrict where former sexual offenders can live, but a 2004 Colorado study seems to show those restrictions have no effect. The Georgia Supreme Court recently overturned the state's law, which was one of the most stringent.

Studies by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy are inconclusive, director Roxanne Lieb says. A 2005 study seemed to show a slight reduction in the rates of re-offending since community notification started, but the change was not statistically significant.

People on the list "might feel more alienated, but they are also more scrutinized," she says. "How do those balance?"

According to the Lancaster man's girlfriend, he lost his job after someone saw his name on the Web site.

When he gets out of prison, he can't live with her because her child is a minor. He says he was refused treatment for alcoholism by 12 government-funded programs because of his record. Some offenders are refused enrollment at colleges or denied membership in churches, he says.

"In treatment, prior offenders are taught to establish critical foundations, including solid employment, stable homes, positive family relationships and strong support networks," he wrote. People who are ostracized and isolated will become increasingly anti-social and "will strike out at society."

A 2005 Florida study showed that 27 percent of released offenders lost their jobs, 20 percent were forced from their homes and 38 percent were threatened by neighbors. Florida also showed a rapid rise in offenders who were refusing to register.

A 2007 report by the Human Rights Watch said many sexual offender laws violate the rights of people who pose little risk.

"These are laws that weren't based on reason -- they were based on a few horrific cases," director Jamie Fellner says.

While sexual offenders' photographs, addresses and vehicular and other personal information appear on the Megan's Law Web site, there is no similar list for murderers or drug dealers. It is partly because sexual offenders have a reputation for being incorrigible.

"Sex offenders as a whole say the impulse is beyond their control," Lebanon County District Attorney Dave Arnold said. "If that's the case, people should know if they're living nearby to protect their children. Sex offenders tend to repeat."

Storm said sexual offenders "have a compulsion, which is why you have such a high rate of recidivism."

Statistics, however, don't bear this out. Taken as a whole, people charged with any kind of sexual crime have less than a 5 percent chance of another conviction within three years, according to a 2003 study by the U.S. Department of Justice. Convicted child molesters who have served time in prison have a 13 percent reconviction rate within five years and convicted rapists have a 19 percent rate.

In contrast, of more than 100,000 people imprisoned for nonsex crimes, 63 percent were arrested again within three years, and 41 percent were sent back to prison.

A Tennessee study following sex offenders released from prison in 2001 for three years showed that 28 percent were recommitted to the prison system within three years, compared to 52 percent of other felons.

The Iowa Department of Human Rights looked at 60 studies and found that sex offenders were half as likely as other felons to end up back in prison.

Critics of the studies say it might be because sexual crimes are underreported.

Certain offenders with personality disorders are more likely to repeat. According to studies, it seems that men who prey on boys are particularly apt to do so again. So are people with long rap sheets, whether the offenses were sexual in nature or not, particularly if some of the crimes were violent.

People in committed relationships and in therapy are the least likely to end up back in prison.

Ranking offenders:

In Pennsylvania, the Sexual Offenders Assessment Board is charged with evaluating everyone accused of a sex crime to determine the risk to society. Those determined to have personality defects that make them most likely to repeat are called sexually violent predators. Of the 9,433 offenders on Pennsylvania's Megan's Law Web site, 204 are sexually violent predators.

Michael Fernsler of Annville, a former police officer who sometimes performed as Chuckles the Clown, is the type of sexually violent predator Storm calls "scary and creepy."

While out on bail awaiting sentencing for sexually abusing two 4-year-old girls, he was charged Nov. 13 with threatening a 14-year-old North Londonderry Twp. girl at knife-point, leading her into the woods, binding her mouth and hands, and attempting to rape her.

Only about 2 percent of those listed on the Web site are designated sexually violent predators. Others have been convicted of offenses ranging from rape to indecent assault, and most offenses do not involve children.

Lauren Taylor, director of the Sexual Offenders Assessment Board, says about 90 percent of sex crimes are committed by people not listed on the site, and most are committed by people known to the victim. The Web site could give people a false sense of security, she says. She says she would like to see "good policy, not just a knee-jerk reaction to the words 'sexual offender.'"

Of the 93 Internet predators charged by the state attorney general's office in the past two years, none was on the Megan's Law Web site.

A recent audit of Pennsylvania's law suggests putting offenders on a three-tier system based on their risk to society. Washington state already does that, and all states will have to do so under the national Adam Walsh act.

A Washington state study showed only about 3 percent of those on the lower tier were convicted again within three years.

"While certain categories have very high rates, it's a small subgroup," said William DiMascio, director of the Pennsylvania Prison Society.

Sheila Moore, deputy press secretary for the state Department of Corrections, said treatment programs for sex offenders "have come a long way in the past two or three years" and can lessen the risk of re-offending.

Convicted sex offenders must complete a treatment program based on cognitive behavioral therapy to be eligible for parole, continue in support groups after their release and submit to annual polygraph tests.

The Lancaster County man says he has "witnessed the positive impact that treatment does have in eliminating the potential for re-offending."

"No prior sex offender should ever be permitted to re-enter society untreated," he says, and if they refuse, they should be committed to mental institutions on their release.

T.W. Ponessi &Associates in Harrisburg provides therapy to more than 400 sexual offenders in prison. Gerald Menaquale, director of Ponessi's sexual offender program, says stress and hopelessness can lead to "a lot of self-destructive behavior."

He said he believes the Megan's Law Web site "is there for a good reason," however.

"My stance with the guys is that they put themselves in this position," he says. "Part of their restitution is they have to spend significant time learning to cope with these stressors."

A Lebanon County man raped a woman 20 years ago during a robbery in Lehigh County while he was high on drugs. He says from prison that he wishes he could go back and "change the things I've done."

Since then, he says, he has come clean and worked hard through counseling to turn his life around. He married two years ago, and his wife calls him "the love of my life." She says he is a good father to her children, but public access to the registry "is like kicking a dog every day."

"No matter what I did, it was not good enough," the Lebanon County man says. "I went through treatment for years, set goals, had dreams, but I felt like I was fighting a losing battle. To isolate and shun people won't help them. I feel scared that the Web site is putting my life and my family's lives in jeopardy without making a difference." ..more.. by MONICA VON DOBENECK: 832-2090 or mdobeneck@patriot-news.com

THE IMPACT OF MEGAN'S LAW

The public wants to know when sex offenders live nearby, but IS IT WORKING?

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Megan's Law: Does it protect children? (2)

An updated review of evidence on the impact of community notification as legislated for by Megan's Law in the United States

November 2006 United Kingdom

Foreword
The NSPCC’s purpose is to end cruelty to children. Children have a right to be protected from all forms of abuse whether within the home or from someone unknown to the child.

Recent public debate has focused on the risks posed by sex offenders to children. The NSPCC believes Government is right to tackle this and is publishing “Megan’s Law: Does it protect children?” as a contribution to this important debate. There is no solid evidence that supports the introduction of Megan’s Law into the UK.

The NSPCC report shows that there is not one Megan’s law but many different variations of community notification. Although the law is popular with parents, there is no evidence that open access to sex offender registers actually enhances child safety. There is no evidence that Megan’s Law reduces reoffending. However, there is some evidence that it may have unintended negative consequences for children.

The NSPCC supports the view that when the police are aware that an offender poses a risk to the public they or the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) should be responsible for informing individuals and the community, as they see fit on a case by case basis. But two things are clear. First, the success, or lack of success, of these arrangements is either not established or, if it has been, has not been well communicated. Secondly, there is significant public concern about arrangements for protecting children from sex offenders in the community.

The NSPCC considers that in the UK there is a danger that public debate is focusing on a small number of high-risk offenders and excluding the many ‘medium-risk’ offenders who also pose a significant risk to children. The NSPCC believes that the current system of monitoring and sharing information about sex offenders under the MAPPA needs to be strengthened. Recent reports suggest that the MAPPAs are overstretched and under resourced. We are concerned that risk assessments are not being consistently carried out, that there are not enough sex offender treatment programmes available, and that multi-agency arrangements are not working consistently.

Measures taken to enhance community safety through the management of registered sex offenders are only one part of keeping children safe. In order for the sexual abuse of children to be addressed effectively, a broad approach is required to ensure that children are supported to talk about abuse, that adults act to stop abuse taking place and that potential abusers themselves are provided with help before they abuse.

Mary Marsh, NSPCC Director and Chief Executive ..more.. by Kate Fitch

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...