Does Megan's Law Work?

Great Debates
1

60 Minutes did a bit on some recent legal scuttlebut on Megan’s Law; communities must be informed if a convicted sex offender or sexual predator moves into the area. Megan, a young 7 year old girl, was molested and killed by a previously convicted sex offender who lived almost across the street from her home. There are various forms of Megan Laws on the books thru out the US. Some states just have pictures with address and current status available on the internet. Other jurisdictions classify sex offenders into three groups I=no risk II=moderate risk and III high risk. Either local law enforcement, community groups/schools or neighbors will be informed when a registered sex offender moves into the community. The current legal question is whether the residential address should be released to the community.

I have mixed feelings about this: I would want to know whether a sex offender moves in my neighborhood because I understand that this type of crime tends to be repeated more than other types of crime. Wouldn’t there be additional motivation to “go straight” if everyone in your community knew what you did before? OTOH, shouldn’t the privacy of an individual who has served their time be considered just that private? What protections against vigilantism, in the name to protect the children, should these folks have?

I went on the net to see what info or analysis was available and I didn’t find much other than a letter to the editor published in 1998. I did check to see how many sex offenders and sexual predator lived in my zip code - gulp! two pages of mostly males that I didn’t know from a guy living on the other end of my road. That seems like the community pressure argument would be invalid …therefore it would not make sense to have a door-to-door cop canvas to inform me that a sex offender was moving in. Privacy rights would seem to win out.

What do you think? What information do you have that could add to this debate?

2

I personally think Megan’s Law is intrusive on civil liberties. To put one of these sickos back in the general population, then humiliate them further and subject them to castigation and possibly vigilante violence by informing neighbors doesnt do anyone good.

We are telling obviously sick and twisted indivdiuals that it is now OK for them to be part of the community again, but only if they wear a scarlet letter.

I’m not a parent, but frankly, informed or not, I would not want one of these sick fucks on my block at all!

Since child molestation is a sickness, we should isolate child molesters from the general population as punishment. This would eliminate the need to inform parents that a child molester is back in the neighborhood.

Or just let them rot in jail for the rest of their lives.

3

In the town that I live in in Oregon, when a convicted sex offender is released from prison, the local newspaper publishes his or her picture, address where they will be living and what the crime they did was and to whom. They are closely monitored by the authorities. They are allowed absolutlely no contact with children of any age. (up to the age of 18, I believe.) If they are found to have had contact of any kind with a child, back to prison they go. I think.

Personally, I think that anybody that mollests a child, or for that matter, mollests anybody, should be dealt with in the most severe ways possible. IE: men = castration. Women = don’t know, but equally severe. And they should have absolutely NO privacy rights, IMHO.

If they do the crime, they can suffer the extreme consequences, as far as I’m concerned.

4

I totally agree with this. In fact I remember a case in Texas (I believe it was Texas) where a prisoner volunteered to be castrated as punishment for his molesting. However, it was blocked by some civil rights group because they considered it cruel & unusual punishment.

5

Yes, I believe in judging all people for eternity by their worst act. The whole idea of trying to make amends, or to reform oneself, is a crock. I think the appropriate form of punishment would involve some sort of long, painful, bloody torture.

Sure, we know that some pedophiles can and do change and become productive, valued members of society, but what the hell, why take the chance? The rights of the minority must always bow to the will of the majority, right?

And sure, living as a “marked man” and an outcast from a community may make it much more likely for an offender to try to go on the run to another state and re-offend, concluding that society will never forgive him or let him atone for his past. But hell, I don’t care. As long as he’s away from my nieghborhood, I don’t care if he molests someone else’s kids.

Thankfully, there are lots more people like me and the folks above, than there are people who give a damn about civil liberties. And as long as we outnumber them, the politicians can be counted on to pass whatever laws we want, fundamental principles of law be damned.

6

What about cases such as that of my girlfriend’s cousin. He was convicted solely on the word of a 5 year old child, who said that he touched him while bathing him. Children are always completely honest of course. And the fact that he was the son of the mother’s boyfriend, and she didn’t file charges until 2 YEARS LATER, and once again, he was convicted SOLELY on that testimony.

So, assuming that he did not in fact commit the crime he has been accused of, castration would be idiotic. It’s an unreversable punishment. While prison time is something that can never be given back to somebody, at least it doesn’t leave a person permanently mutilated.

peronally, I believe such laws should be made obsolete. 1 incident, you serve your time and are released, with no scarlet letters. Second time, you are placed in prison for life.

Further more, cases would require more than the word of one child.

7

My problem with laws like this is the fact their claim to “protect our children”. The same line the do-gooders use to try and restrict responsible adults from viewing, reading, listening to, or having access to materials that “they” deem harmful to children. My question from the beginning, when they were debating these laws across the country was:
“Why do they only apply to sex crimes?”
[sarcasmmode]
Don’t I have a right to know if a paroled murderer, thief, con artist, or junkie is living in my community, so that I may protect myself and my family accordingly? Someone mentioned the recidivism rate among molesters, but you can bet your last dollar, that the relapse rate of addicts is astronomical in comparison!
Shouldn’t I also be informed when ANY repentant/reformed criminal is released? Why don’t we just start criminal communities where those people (ALL the criminals) can be released to, and spend their lives with one another?
[/sarcasmmode]

8

Earlier in the year, in Great Britain, a community identified a local resident as a child molestor thanks to their version of “Megan’s Law.” He and his home were subjected to several assaults and, IIRC, his house was burned.

Turns out it was the wrong guy. He just looked like the guy in question.

Any law that encourages vigilante justice against people who have already served their prison time is, IMNSHO, a bad law.

9

Does Megan’s Law work? to do what? prevent any particular individual child from molestation? Don’t know that it can be proved.

Actually, your assumption that molesters are more likely to reoffend than other convicted offenders is wrong. Flat out. Molesters who molest their same sex are more likely to reoffend than those who molest opposite sex. Molesters who molest within their own family are less likely to reoffend than those who molest strangers. Molesters, as a ** group ** are ** less ** likely to reoffend than other offenders.

What Megan’s Laws DO is create a large cumbersome structure that allows some parents to FEEL as if they are doing something concrete to protect their child.

In MI, the sex offender registry contains many errors (including having addresses listed where no molester lives, can you imagine how fun that is?).

And what are you going to ** do ** with the information? Burn the guys house down (that’s been done)? Warn your child to stay away from that bad man there?

Let’s examine that last one. This is the tactic that frightens me the most. Children do not process information the same way we do. When you point the man out as being bad, and stay away, what they ** hear ** is that pretty much every one else is ok.

Your child is most likely to be molested by some one the family knows and trusts already. So, my preference to protect **my ** child is to make him a bad victim.

I taught him that he should NEVER keep a secret from me and if some one ** told ** him to do so, to hurry and tell me right away. I told him to ** never** go anywhere unless I knew about it first. Not simply “dont’ go to that man’s house” or “get into cars with strangeres”. Molesters are very, very good at getting kids to comply with them (Here, I’ve got something to show you. Can you help me find my puppy? etc). Molestations can occur in closets, cars, open areas etc.

I taught him that if some one tried to physically grab at him, he should scream bloody hell. I’ve taught him to tell me immediately if ANYONE ever wants to take his picture, give him a present, have him go somewhere, play “special” games.

Knowing who the convicted abusers are is important for the police in order to investigate a crime. Of course, even for the police it does nothing if the person hasn’t been convicted.

About the only thing you might be able to accomplish is to make sure ** that** abuser doesn’t molest your child. And I’m not even guarenteeing that. But at the same time, you may be setting your child up to be the perfect victime for some one else.

10

There were a couple stories that I read where an innocent person was identified and attacked by vigilanties. One was a mentally disabled man who moved into a home that used to be occupied by sex offender, needless to say he didn’t deserve to be beaten up.

My personal favorite was in Britain. A group of concerned citizens vandalized the home of a pediatrician because they thought that her title meant she was a child molester.

The law should not be in the hands of the average person, they ussually don’t know what to do w/ it. Police should have records of these people but the addresses should not be published. I agree with muffinman, repeat offenders should be sent to prison for life. First time offenders should rec. manditory counseling, not that this seems to do a lot of good but it can’t hurt. There always has been and always will be innocent people who go to prison for a crime they did not commit.

11

there was a case near me where a man (a citizen of GB) had molested a young boy. The boy’s parents, instead of reporting the crime, blackmailed the guy. When the story came out, the molester was sentenced to prison. When he was about to be released, the local parole office sent an officer out to check out the residence. But he got lost and had to ask directions to the house. The next day, the man’s house had burned down. The arsonists never were caught.

and, frankly, it was all for nothing anyhow. They committed a criminal act, destroyed property, placing firemen’s lives in danger, placing the nearby other properties in danger because they didn’t want a molester living there. The guy, however was not a citzen, and at the point when he would have been paroled, the state deported him instead. That was already in the works before the fire. The parole agent had to make the house check because of their own internal rules. He was never actually going to be there.

I still had a MAJOR problem with the parents of the kid choosing to keep silent and take $$ from the guy.

12

We don’t really have anything like Megan’s Law in Britain. The relevant piece of legislation is the Sex Offenders Act 1997, which requires certain people convicted of sexual offences to notify the police of their name and address after they are released from prison, but does not require the information to be made available to the public.

What happened here was that a newspaper, the News of the World, decided that the information should be available to the public, and started publishing the names, addresses and photographs of convicted paedophiles who had been released from prison. Except they got some of the names wrong. And some of the addresses. And some of the photographs. The result was a weird kind of moral panic in which numerous people, some of whom were convicted paedophiles and some of whom were not, were attacked and had their houses and cars set fire to. The story about the paediatrician whose home was attacked is here.

13

I think this thread will do better in Great Debates. I’ll move it over there for you.

14

Wring: you make some good points as did TomH, jonas, Mann Slaughter and pldennison. Muffinman’s story about his gf’s cousin is tragic. The MacMartin case is another example of “justice” gone wrong.

While one can understand the emotionalism and the shoot from the hip responses towards those that have been a threat to children, it is irresponsible and unproductive to release resident information of former offenders. It is ineffectual, can be misleading and result in further illegal actions which may well effect the innocent. The information should be made available only to law enforcement and relevant social services.

Alhtough this is a serious topic, I did laugh over the mixup between pediatrician and pedophile!!! Dumb nuts.

15

I first saw this thread this morning but since I am at home taking care of my daughters I was pulled away before I could chip in my two cents.

I got to consult an expert in the field of child welfare who has had too much experience treating the victims of sexual assault. Her information on the predators / sexual deviants that perpetrate these acts would indicate that there is no cure for their illness. Most of the perpetrators are male.

I did some reading too.

From the F.B.I. on child molesters:

They will have three victims before the age of 18.

They usually have 24 victims during adulthood.

Child molesters will perpetrate 25 molestations before being caught once.

The FBI also breaks down the types of child molesters for investigative purposes:

TYPES OF CHILD MOLESTERS

FBI Typology:

The FBI has classified child molesters into 2 major groups:

1.Situational offenders (prefer adults as sexual partners)
2.Preferential offenders (prefer children as sexual partners)

There are 4 subtypes of situational offenders and 3 subtypes of preferential offenders. This
classification system is used in criminal investigations:

Situational Offenders:

  1. Regressed:

    · Tends to be immature and socially inept

    · Relates to children as peers

    · Usually has adult relationships, but a series of events may lead to onset of
    molesting

    · May molest a child during a period of low self-esteem

  2. Morally Indiscriminate:

    · The basic criminal who has numerous non-sexual antisocial behaviors

    · Chooses victims based on vulnerability and opportunity

    · Picks children because they tend to be more vulnerable than adults

  3. Sexually Indiscriminate:

    · Experiments with many types of sexual behavior

    · Tends to be sexually addicted

    · Uses sex to alter his mood

    · May look “normal” in other parts of his life, but is out of control in his
    sexual life

  4. Inadequate:

    · The social misfit who may be developmentally disabled, psychotic, senile,
    or organically dysfunctional

    · Would like an adult partner, but is extremely shy

    · Rarely has contact with others

    · May see children as vulnerable objects to be used to satisfy his sexual
    curiosity

    · May murder his victims, however, any molester is capable of committing
    murder to avoid detection

Preferential Offenders:

  1. Seductive:

    · Tends to be manipulative and glib, with good social skills

    · Grooms his victims with gifts, wrestling, and games

    · May rationalize by saying he is a “good parent” or that he “cares for the
    child better than the parents do”

    · Adept at identifying those children who will not tell

    · Can pick out the straggler or lonely child

    · Tends to collect child pornography

    · Classic examples include priests and boy scout leaders who molest

  2. Introverted:

    · Shy and has poor social skills

    · Tends to molest strangers or very young children

    · May marry a woman with children in the age range of his sexual preference

    · Feels safer emotionally with children

  3. Sadistic:

    · Most dangerous offender, and fortunately, the most rare

    · Becomes sexually aroused by inflicting pain on the child

    · Control is the primary motivator

    · Tends to collect sadomasochistic and bondage pornography

    · John Wayne Gacy is an example of this type of offender. He kidnapped
    boys and killed them.

    · Violence occurs in 10-15% of sex offenses with children

My position on how to deal with child molesters is this:

By victimizing the most vulnerable members of our society and based on the high probability of them perpetrating more assaults on other children I don’t feel that these people should enjoy the same rights as you and I. They do not deserve the same right to privacy if that right jeopardizes the safety of others, specifically yours and my children.

I do not want to have people like this as my neighbours and if a convicted offender did move into my neighborhood I would want to know about it as would my neighbours.

Forget the name and address listings because child molesters just don’t just stay at home like they used to. Tattoo the bastards right across their forehead so if they come anywhere near my children they will know to run in the other direction. Arrest them and throw away the key if they are seen anywhere near a school. If they re-offend send them to Siberia to work in a chain gang, naked. At some point their tools will simply freeze off.

(I will be in the Pit if anyone needs me, writing this has got me really pissed off).

16

Something that was touched upon earlier in the thread: the offenders’ registry in many jurisdictions nowadays is for ** all Sexual Offenders **. Not necessarily dangerous pedophiles and/or rapists. Have sex with a willing 15-year old, whammo, bring out the branding irons, specially if the DA/Judge’s election is coming up shortly. OTOH, you’ve whacked a couple of dudes – no problem.

The idea is good. The unthinking approach to it is the problem.

jrd

17

again, I would like cites from folks contending that “molesters cannot be cured”.

the two most common statements that I hear on the subject are “they can’t be cured” and “they always molest again”.

The stats I’ve seen are that molesters as a group are less likely than other criminals to reoffend. and that treatment is effective.

FTR. Child molestation is a heinous crime.

that being said, there are situations that give me pause.

for example: The young man who’s father and uncle molested him from age 6 on up, had sexual contact when he was 17, with another person who was 15 and underage. He did 3 years, his molesters are in for life (as they should be). He’s been out now for at least 10 years and hasn’t gotten so much as a parking ticket.

The man who had been molested when he was a child, had brain damage from a child hood injury and went on to inappropriate touching of his neice. He’s been out for 9 years, hasn’t reoffended.

In both of those cases, they repeated what had been done (and unpunished) to them. Does this make it ok? of course not. However, studies I have seen (where they follow treatment of molesters for years post release) show treatment is effective.

How about the young adult who, at 20 has what they think is consensual touching with a contemporary, but turns out the other person lied about their age? In my state, the charge would still be child molesting. When was the last time you demanded positive proof of age from some one before intimate contact?

Anyhow. I understand the “creep factor” when dealing with this subject. I feel it too. And, with some of the guys I’ve known, the “creep factor” was higher than others.

What I AM in favor of is a well thought out system of dealing with the issue. First, take care of the issues about contemporaries - it is materially different for a 17 year old to be with a 15 year old than a 40 year old with a 15 year old. Next, treatment DOES work in many cases. Treatment should START while incarcerated, and continue post release. Monitoring their adjustment should continue for longer than the average parole.

I don’t,however, see what Megans Laws do to protect anyone.
The issue to me is that we’ve set up this cumbersome, expensive, process that is full of inaccuracies on it’s best days, can lead to cases of vigilante justice (which put all of us at risk), and yet does not actually protect anyone.

I fear that people who rely on “megans laws” to think they’re protecting their children are fooling themselves. All it potentially can do is tell them with varying degrees of accuracy, if there is a convicted person living near them. Visiting? nope. working? nope. walking through? nope. unconvicted? nope Just moved in? nope. Convicted in another country? nope. get the idea?

18

Cite ?

19

I’m having trouble finding again the report I found on USA national crime stats (we swapped out computers last week, so lost research I’d done there).

anyhow, heres some sites that refer to Canadian studies and show similar results. (I’ve listed these on the other Megan’s law thread as well).
Here’s some of the sites that back up about what I’ve stated:

http://venus.soci.niu.edu/~archives/TOMPAINE/feb97/0130.html

http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pblct/forum/e082/e082k.shtml