|
|
|
|
NOTE: Advertisements at the top of this page are placed there by our web hosting company and while we encourage you to visit the companies that may interest you; they DO NOT reflect the opinions or are an official sponsor of the Sex Offender Solutions Network.
Voices of the
EXPERTS:
The following excerpts are a compilation of quotes from
experts in Constitutional Law, Law Enforcement, and Psychology, regarding the
effectiveness of proximity (residency restrictions) and registration laws.
“Therapy works for
these people. Let them be punished for
their crimes, let them out and let them get on with their lives. Let them work. Let them have stable homes and families and
let them live in peace. Harassing them,
making them move and continually punishing them does far more harm than
good. A sex offender in therapy with a
job and a place to live is less of a threat than one that is constantly
harassed.”
-- Robert Shilling, Detective, Crimes Against
Children Division, /
“If the 2,000-foot
rule had been in effect 10 years ago, I can’t think of a single case from our
files that would have been any different.”
-- Sgt. Bryce Smith, Sex Offender Registry
Officer, /
“What you’re doing is
pushing people more underground, pushing them away from treatment and pushing
them away from monitoring, you’re really not improving the safety, but you are
giving people a false sense of safety.”
-- John Gruber, Executive Director of the
Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers
“We went from knowing
where about 90 percent of them were.
We’re lucky if we know where 50 to 55 percent of them are now...the law
created an atmosphere that these individuals can’t find a place to live.”
-- Sheriff Don Zeller, /
“When I talk with
friends, colleagues and neighbors regarding this law, the first reaction is
that we must do everything we can to protect our children. Absolutely. But I am afraid this statute gives parents
and communities a false sense of protection against crimes that most often
occur not at school bus stops, but where children are in the greatest danger:
their own homes.”
-- J. Tom Morgan,
“It may be time to do
away with sex offender registration laws altogether. At the very least, the federal government
should commission research to study the laws’ effectiveness. In the meantime, several changes should be
made. States should differentiate
between serious and non-serious offenders and only require registration of the
most serious offenders. Next, public
access to online sites should be dismantled, and registries should be kept at
the local police stations. This would
provide at least a minimal screening process to those seeking inquiries…
Lastly, we should experiment with restorative justice models such as what has
happened in Canada where sex offenders moving into a community meet with
members of the community in a public forum facilitated by a trained
mediator. This type of forum gives the
community an opportunity to meet the offender face to face and express their
concerns and for the offender to show the community that he is earnestly
seeking to change his life.”
-- Rachel King, Professor of Law,
“Though laudable in
their intent, there is little evidence that recently enacted housing policies
achieve their stated goals of reducing recidivistic sexual violence. In fact, there is little research at all
evaluating the effectiveness of these policies. Furthermore, these policies are
not evidence-based in their development or implementation, as they tend to
capture the widely heterogeneous group of sex offenders rather than utilize
risk assessment technology to identify those who pose a high danger to public
safety.”
-- Jill S. Levenson, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Human
Services,
“The
recent wave of sex offender legislation is based upon emotion and myths about
sex offenders which are not supported by valid research or evidence.
Legislation in this area should be based upon facts and valid evidence. The
NACDL encourages criminal defense lawyers, prosecutors and legislators to
oppose legislation based upon myth and public emotion. In doing so we can
ensure both public safety and due process.”
-- Report of the
Sex Offender Policy Task Force, National Association of Criminal Defense
Lawyers
“I
would rather have someone who has committed a sex offense be going to work
every day, come home tired, have a sense of well-being that comes from having a
regular paycheck and a safe home, as opposed to having a sex offender who has a
lot of free time on his hands.”
-- Richard Hamill,
President of the
“The
current law applies to too many offenders and I spend ‘way, way too much of my
time’ trying to enforce it, I believe less than 10% of the state's 8,000
convicted sex offenders to be high-risk and is lobbying lawmakers to focus on
them”
-- Sgt. Gary
Stansill, Sex-crimes Unit / Tulsa Police Department
“What
we're doing with sexual predator laws is creating or enlarging an exception to
those constraints. We're saying the government can take away people's liberty
... based on a prediction that somebody might be dangerous in the future.”
-- Eric Janus, Vice
Dean,
“The
more cities choose to install these ordinances, the more ex-offenders will
become an exile class, sex offenders are less likely to reoffend if they're
allowed to reintegrate into society, to get a job, to establish stable roots, a
support network, a home, by forcing these people to be refugees, politicians
are essentially making their own citizens less safe.”
-- William Buckman,
defense attorney and national sex offender policy expert
“The
law was well-intentioned, but we don't see any evidence of a connection between
where a person lives and where they might offend.”
-- Corwin
R. Ritchie,
“We're
not aware of any evidence that residency restrictions have prevented a child
from being victimized.”
-- Carolyn
Atwell-Davis, Director of Legislative Affairs,
CLICK
HERE TO RETURN TO START HERE PAGE
bravenet.com