Sex offender residency restrictions
I usually try to do one post on civil cases a week here, but as you might have guessed from the title, that’s going to be a stretch this week. True, the case I’m going to discuss, the 8th District’s decision a couple weeks back in City of Parma v. Silvis, is nominally a civil one, but only by buying into the fiction that laws pertaining to sex offenders — sexual predator designations, residency restrictions — are really “civil” actions of a remedial nature.
Silvis was caught up in the current craze for imposing stiff residency restrictions on sexual offenders. In 2006, seventeen years after Silvis’ convictions and designation as a sexual offender, the City of Parma asked the court to evict him from his house under RC 2950.031, because it was situated within 1000 feet of an elementary school. Barely: the prosecutor’s argument was that the distance between the front corner of the school’s lawn and the front corner of Silvis’ driveway was 997 feet.
But argument is all it was; although the prosecutor stated that if the defendant didn’t stipulate to an aerial map, he’d call witnesses to prove the distance, the record contained no stipulation, no witnesses were ever called, and the map never found its way into the record. The appellate court concluded that the trial judge’s order to Silvis to vacate his home was against the manifest weight of the evidence, a decision undoubtedly made easier by the fact that there was no evidence supporting it.
If it sounds like I’m defending the right of sex offenders to live among us, I’m not. Silvis wasn’t a choirboy by any stretch, as his convictions for rape and kidnapping would attest. I’m not even going to buy into the argument that he’d “done his time,” and shouldn’t suffer further punishment or humiliation.
But like so much of the criminal justice system, residency restrictions on sex offenders are a classic example of the Law of Unintended Consequences. The idea was to protect children from “stranger danger,” the pedophile lurking around playgrounds and schools. Fortunately, while child abductions get the media coverage, they’re exceedingly rare; about 80-90% of child molestations are perpetrated by acquaintances or family members, and residency restrictions don’t do anything to effect that. All the available evidence indicates that sex offender restrictions haven’t done anything to reduce sex crimes against children.
If the laws were merely ineffective, that wouldn’t be a problem, but there’s evidence to suggest that they’re counterproductive in several ways, as the Iowa County Attorneys Association, hardly a pro-criminal organization, noted in a recent report. Echoing similar findings from studies in Colorado, Florida, and Minnesota, the Association noted that such laws tend to result in sex offenders wind up bouncing around to various residencies or even becoming homeless, making them harder to track. One state found that the net result of its residency restrictions was no change in the rate of child sex abuse offenses, but a doubling of the number of sex offenders who were supposed to register with police but hadn’t.
Complicating all this, of course, is the blunderbuss approach of “sex offense” categorization. It would be one thing if the registration requirements were applied only to convicted child molesters, but the classification of sex offenders subject to residency restrictions often goes far beyond that. Oklahoma, which prohibits sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or day care center, includes a conviction for urinating in public as a sex offense.
But as in most aspects of criminal justice, there’s far more political gain in pursuing harsh policies than in pursuing sensible ones. On Tuesday night, the Green Bay city council approved a law banning sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school, church, park, day care center, or youth facility, essentially making all but a small sliver on the north side of the city off limits. And last week the City of Upper Arlington, a suburb of Columbus, Ohio, passed an ordinance not only restricting sex offenders from living with 1,000 feet of any “School Premises, Licensed Daycare Facility, Preschool, Any Public Park, Swimming Pool, Library or Playground,” but from being employed within 1,000 feet from those areas as well.
| 
| | Posted by Russ Bensing at 7:09 am
March 22nd, 2007 at 11:56 am
With the implementation of sex offender zoning or restrictive areas, the only people being hurt are the families of the sex offenders. As pointed out in the article, depending which state you live in, determines what a sex offense is, IE, in “Oklahoma, which prohibits sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or day care center, includes a conviction for urinating in public as a sex offense.”
The entire subject of sex offenders has totally lost any resemblance of actual danger. When the sex offender laws first came out, it was strictly for keeping watch on the most dangerous offenders, not as it is today where a boy/girlfriend, both underage, have sex and being found out, suffer for the rest of their lives for being listed as sex offenders.
Sex offenders come from all walks of life. There is no sure fire way to determine who will be a sex offender or not. Contrary to the above, once an offender completes the court imposed sentence, they should be allowed to rebuild their lives without further hindrance, not the eternal re-punishment over and over again for life. This type of thinking segregates SO’s from the rest of those who commit crimes, IE, the drug dearer who sells to your child while in school. If that isn’t Gross child abuse, then there really is not such thing as justice in this country.
We do not need to feed the political coffers or feed off the daily paper, that subscribes to the total hate and destruction of one class of people. Remember, the sex offenders you chastise today may be you tomorrow for 95% of child molestation cases come from within the home or the circle of familial authorities your child knows. By allowing those who do feed on your tax dollars to gain re-election or further expansion of the area covered (newspapers & TV), with something that makes you “feel-good”, doesn’t work at all from saving a single child.
There is no such thing as “if”.
March 23rd, 2007 at 3:17 pm
I agree as one of the members of a sex offenders family. I was devasted to find out my beloved husband had been “educating my 10 yr old daughter in a show and tell mode. I turned him in, he was arrested and convicted, and we participated in a family reunification program that treated the whole family. That was 23 years ago. The current political hype that sex offenders are not treatable is not true of the majority of offenders, just a select few hard core pediphiles. My family, especially my daughter, received help to get past this. Current laws have already forced us to move once. My husband has become an agrophobic afraid to step out of the house unless I am with him. He was never a danger to anyone outside the family. My daughter is now 34 with children of her own and I hate those people who say a child is ruined for life as if they can never overcome what has happened to them. It is secrecy and “not telling” that causes permanent harm and today’s climate would have prevented me and my family from receiving the help we got back then. Think of the children you are condemning to silence when you say these laws are protecting children. Any child who knows telling will destroy her family will keep that secret even when the secret is destroying her.
April 17th, 2007 at 4:39 am
I want to direct you to one issue on my blog, but I also encourage you to read more of my blog.
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/03/yellow-journalism-in-augusta-georgia.html
and
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/04/my-thoughts-sex-offender-law-issues.html
One last note. Why are child sex offenders placed on the public registry? And when in jail/prison, placed in the same place as the adult offenders? Doesn’t this just seem wrong to you? As for the registry, it would seem to me like that is an open invitation for a predator to use to seek their next victim. Doesn’t make sense to me. I personally think ALL sex offenders below 18 should be removed from the registry and also young offenders should be segregated from adult offenders to prevent further abuse.
LINKS
* http://www.nacdl.org/sl_docs.nsf/issues/sexoffender_attachments/$FILE/sexOffenderPolicy.pdf
* http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/
* http://sexoffenderinfo.pbwiki.com
* http://www.soclear.org
* http://politically-sparked.blogspot.com/
ISSUES
* I do not believe in registries period, but if the sex offender laws are kept, why discriminate? I DEMAND WE HAVE A CRIMINAL HISTORY REGISTRY, SO I KNOW IF YOU ARE A MURDERER, GANG MEMBER, DRUG DEALER/USER, DRUNK, THIEF! IT’S MY RIGHT! Why won’t this fly? Because then the senator, mayor, governor, president, celebrities or you may be on a publicly accessible registry to face the same shame and harassment. But why not? Why discriminate?
* When will people ever realize no matter how tough on crime, all the zero tolerance, all the registries in the world will not prevent a murderer from murdering, a thief from stealing, a dealer from dealing, a user from using, a rapist from raping….accusations on any sex crime, child abuse, or domestic violence will literally nail your butt to the wall! No DNA has to be present, No violence has to be present….. HEARSAY ALONE IS LITERALLY NAILING THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO THE WALL BECAUSE THESE LAWS ARE BIASED.
* Living is already almost impossible for “sex offenders”, and the more and more laws that are passed daily, eventually they are going to explode, and it won’t be a pretty sight. You must be realistic when making laws, these draconian laws make it impossible for anyone to live ANY type of life. Everyone is for treatment and punishing those violent offenders who are making other sex offenders lives hell, but like I said, we must be realistic.
* For all the people being charged with Child p**nography, is the law checking the computers to make sure they are not infected with a virus? Many people are ignorant when it comes to computers, and if they click on some attachment in an email, their machine can become infected with a virus, trojan, spyware, adaware program which stores child p**n on their machine. Are these so called “experts” checking this? Or ignoring this possibility?
* The issue with sex offenders Internet email addresses, IM names, etc being collected, this is another “feel good” law that will not stop crime. If someone wanted to commit a new crime, they’d create a new email address and commit the crime. This is stupid and won’t work. It is just another waste of the taxpayers money.
* Think!! Come up with solutions, not “feel good” laws, which make it harder and harder for sex offenders to get on with their lives.
* “Buffer Zones” are a false sense of security!
* “Buffer Zones” are banishing people from their town, state, and possibly the country!
* “Buffer Zones” create homelessness, which costs society lost productivity, individual dignity, and creates additional problems for enforcing any accurate registry!
* “Buffer Zones” do nothing, except banish! It could be 50 miles and if someone wanted to re-offend, they’d just get in a car and drive!
* It should be MANDATORY that anyone in prison get therapy, and out of prison, if needed. Therapy does work. If you just lock them up without therapy, when they get out, they will be worse off. Therapy teaches people how to not act out and help, regardless of what the general public thinks. Just ask a therpist.
* We need to STOP this hysteria and get sex offenders the help they need.
* You can pass all the laws you want but without therapy this “mob” mentality will not solve anything!
* I am sick of politicians using children to get their laws passed! Who would want to vote against anything that is “for the children”?
* “Stranger Danger” is a smoke screen & hype! Most child sexual offenses occur by someone the child knows, like a family member or close friend!
* These laws are being passed by politicians using sex offenders as scape goats, for votes!
* Registries do NOT protect anyone or prevent crimes!
* Registries are punishing sex offenders as well as their families and children, and opening them up to vigilantism. DON’T THE FAMILIES AND CHILDREN OF sex OFFENDERS COUNT? They are suppose to be “for the children”, right?
* Registries are NOT being updated in a timely fashion, so the public is getting false information! How is this helping the public or protecting them when they cannot rely on them?
* Registries are putting families and children of sex offenders in a public position to be socially outcast and discriminated against with regard to employment, housing, schooling, etc!
* About 90% of the people on the registry are NOT violent offenders that these laws were ment for in the first place!
* These laws cost millions, if not billions to enforce, and they cause prison over-population, which is already a problem, especially in California, and taxpayers pay for all this.
* GPS does not prevent sexual crimes! Another false sense of security which cost tons of money! Plus the offenders are supposed to pay for this, which will make them eventually go homeless. MAKE THE TAX PAYERS WHO WANT THESE LAWS PAY FOR THEM!
* These laws cause sex offenders to go underground and into hiding, due to the strict nature of the laws! How is this protecting anyone?
* These laws are all about money for law enforcement and votes for politicians. Prison is a business! Politicians are salaried and want to get elected/re-elected! Law enforcement get paid for people in jails, prisons or on the registry!
* These laws blatantly disregard the United States constitutional rights of all citizens! (i.e. ex-post facto, due process & others)
* These laws are cruel and unusual punishment! A sex offender cannot go to a fast food restaurant which has a playground! Why? They have just as much of a right as you to get a burger! Plus they cannot go anywhere kids congregate. (i.e. Amusement parks, Movie theaters, the list is endless)
* Sex offenders can go to church, but must leave immediately afterwards. If a sex offender owns a business and someone decides to put a church or school next door, they have to now sell their business and move. This is not right, move the church or school, the sex offender was there first!
* These laws continue to punish people even after a sentence has been served, and they are trying to get on with their lives! (i.e. ex-post facto)
* These laws are driven by fear-mongering, opportunistic politicians and will do nothing to actually protect children!
* There are over one million women and children whose lives are inter-twined with a sex offender in the United States. They should matter too!
* Follow the money trail, these laws are conveyor-belt laws to benefit law enforcement! They get paid for the number of people in jail, prison or on the registry!
* They are currently a one-size-fits all for sex offenders! Not all sex offenders are violent offenders that these laws are supposed to be for anyway!
* They are modern day witch hunts and a scarlett letter!
* If sex Offenders are re-offending, why do the registries grow each day? Because new people are being added daily for stuff like “public urination”, “mooning”, “concensual sex”, “young children playing ‘Doctor’” and various other minor offenses that we need not worry about. We need to worry about violent offenders!
* Now they are trying to make it a law that a sex offender, if they have kids, cannot “take a picture” of anyone under 18. This is totally stupid! Can’t even take Christmas pictures, birthday pictures, etc!
* Also, because a sex offender owns a business in town, many people are trying to get the business shut down! The sex offender had the business for awhile. If you don’t like it, MOVE!!!!
May 1st, 2008 at 11:27 am
I agree,, the laws are stupid,, u cant live next to a school,, but u can live in a building full of kids,,,,and Schools are Supervised!! AND a person can go a visit someone next to a school and stay there all day,,,while school is in,, but they Cant sleep there at night when no kids are in school??? But all this reminds me of the treatments of blks in the past,,, The registry and restrictions is Predjudice made legal!!!
July 18th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
MY EX HUSBAND MOLESTED A LITTLE GIRL AND I WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHERE HE CAN AND CAN NOT GO WITH MY KIDS, SKATING RINK, BOWLING ALLEY, ADVENTURE ISLAND THERE ARE KIDS EVERYWHERE HE IS FREE TO GO WITH MY KIDS THERE AND HIS NEW WIFE IS WITH HIM? BOTTOM LINE AS A PERSON ABUSED AS A CHILD I HAVE BE AFFECTED FOR LIFE BY WHAT HAPPEN TO ME BUT IT HAS MADE ME MORE AWARE AND A BETTER MOM BUT AFTER MY DIVORCE I FIND OUT MY EX COMMITTED THIS CRIME WHILE WE WERE MARRIED AND I DIDNT SEE THE SIGNS. BOTTOM LINE HE DID THE CRIME AND IS A OFFENDER AND WHEN HE HAS MY KIDS HE CAN DO WHAT HE WANTS AS LONG AS MY KIDS ARE THERE…WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS WORLD!!