Slow but Positive Movement in Public Opinion on Sex Offense Laws
Dear Members and Advocates,
The biggest issue this past week has been the re-settlement of the Miami-Dade encampment. As required by law (and forced under threat of arrest by the Bovo Amendment), within 5 days of eviction, 270 people registered to the tracks have had to find new places to register. Most have settled along 36th/37th Avenue (one street away from the old encampment), but either 30 blocks north or south. Again in industrial areas, again on street corners, again without shelter, running water or sanitation and as they were at the tracks, in Shorecrest and even under the Julia Tuttle causeway, homeless.
The largest cluster, approximately 100 people relocated to NW 36th/37th Avenue and the State Road 112 overpass. Approximately 30 went 20 blocks north from the old encampment. Clusters of a dozen or so popped up elsewhere, on the border of the keys, the corner of Opa-Locka airport, some even went back to Shorecrest! In the coming days, communities will start objecting and registrants will be chased out, until they consolidate at the last location to complain and, from there, we’ll quickly be back to two-hundred seventy people and beyond. Beyond, because these laws apply forever, registration in Florida lasts for lifetime, there’s no attrition and ever year hundreds of new sex offenders are released into the community with nowhere to live. The cycle will continue, mark our words!
Things are being done to help the transients and registrants subject to Sex Offender Residency Restrictions, in general. The lawsuit filed by Legal Services of Greater Miami in State court is continuing. Even though the preliminary injunction was not granted, the underlying lawsuit is still going on. The purpose of that lawsuit is to challenge the Bovo Amendment which allows police to arrest sex offenders on sight, by removing the requirement they give homeless “overnight campers” the option to go to a homeless shelters when it comes to someone on the registry. In October, we still have trial in the Federal Lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the 2500 foot residency restriction. Trial was supposed to take place this summer, but on motion of the County, the Judge agreed to postpone. The delay is frustrating, but we’ll get there!
In the meantime; we’re making a dent in public opinion. After a few televised appearances in which he appeared “unhinged”, the strongest advocate for residency restrictions, Ron Book, has been losing credibility. ACLU Board Member Jeanne Baker and Journalist Jim DeFede both brought solid statistics to debates against Book, which he could only respond with hysterics and unsupported nonsense. Book was also dealt a blow from the County in a matter unrelated to our cause, after they unanimously called him out on a conflict of interest.
We are working on a project to debunk many of the “myths” perpetuated by Ron and Lauren Book about recidivism rates and how spreading these lies has enriched them. The project would include compiling statements made by the Books before the media and testimony before the legislature and commission meetings and then presenting the facts, taken from meta-studies and government reports. If you have video-editing experience and would like to get involved in this project, please let us know!
Another important matter we wanted to bring to our member’s attention. Many of you have been receiving a solicitation in the mail from a Texas law firm called Estes-Hightower, soliciting a retainer to bring a lawsuit challenging the registry. FAC does not support their lawsuit. FAC has retained Florida firm Weitzner & Jonas, P.A. to file an Ex Post Facto challenge on behalf of registrants in Florida. Our suit is already funded. Our suit will be filed in August. A lot of effort and resources have been put into developing our suit, which could only be undermined by a second, duplicitous lawsuit. If Estes-Hightower wants to share resources and join in our suit (under the direction of the attorneys we retained), we would feel differently, but at this point we are encouraging our members to ignore the solicitations.
Finally, on the other side of the world, the country of India is debating their own Sex Offender Registry. While the concept of a registry was made law, they are still unsure of how such a registry would be implemented and the National Crime Records Bureau has invited bids to develop their registry. At the same time, before any registry is implemented, the public is chiming in on what works and what doesn’t. Those opposed to the registry are pointing a finger at the United States as a prime example of what DOES NOT work, as well as all the unintended consequences that reduces former offender’s chances of securing employment and housing as well as exposure to vigilantism and social ostracism, all of which have lead to an increased rate of re-offense. Hopefully, with the benefit of learning lessons from the bad example set by the United States, India won’t make the same mistakes.
Sincerely,
The Florida Action Committee