Video: Limitations of the Sex Offender Registry
Each month, daycare supervisor Karla Rivero gets a new batch of mugshots of registered sex offenders that live near her work: Busy Bees Child Care Center in Lancaster.
“If I could tell you the amount of papers we receive in a month, it’s ridiculous,” Rivero said.
This young lady at the day care does not understand there is more of a chance she will hire someone without a record who will harm the child under her care than the guy living down the street. I will say I was happy to see a balanced report. And yes, we do need to talk about it more. And the young lady’s fear is exactly why.
Where did they get the statistics of 24 % repeat offenses after 15 yrs. ? And why was the statistic of 98% of child abuse a close family member or friend. That woman needs to be informed that what she needs to be concerned with are those working in her facility and not on a registry instead of some stranger living a half mile away that is working who knows where during the day when she is open and with kids there.
Exactly DavidM. Unfortunately as the woman said when “they” hear sex offender all rational thinking goes straight out the window. I do not have all these fancy statistics these agencies claim but I would say your 98% number is dead on….abused my sister and I were but a stranger was not the problem….FAMILY definitely was though. Hysteria, panic, and just plain drama drives many “I am perfect and I know everything” humans.
What they intentionally don’t stress is that these figures represent a cumulative value and not an individual’s absolute probability of recidivism at any given time.
For example, if recidivism risk was 5% in the first year, 4% in the second, 3% in the fourth and 2% in the fifth, the risk of recidivism could be said to be 14%. When in reality, the risk of any individual recidivating by that time would be approaching zero. Note that the numbers I used were only to illustrate the concept. The mathematically inclined among you just need to integrate the area under an actual recidivism curve.
“Lies, damned lies and statistics.”
Veritas.
“The Department of Justice acknowledges that many reoffenses are not reported.” Standard law enforcement BS: “frightening and high” rhetoric! How do they have any idea whatsoever how many reoffenses are not reported …. IF THEY ARE NOT REPORTED!!!???
As usual, LEOs speak under color of authority on things they know nothing about. 😡
Those LE assertions are also blunted by Professor Ellman’s point that the unreported number is not relevant to registration discussions. If 95% of reported crimes are committed by non-registrants, why would that percentage be any different for unreported crimes? David, in this case their color of authority is brown. Pure BS.
Veritas
Yep.
And not only that are there any people who believe that PFRs are committing crimes and that those are not being reported?!?! With most sex crimes the perpetrator is known. Are there people who believe those perpetrators are PFRs?! Surely not. That would mean not only did the awesome Hit Lists not prevent a crime but also that any victim(s) didn’t want to harm the PFR. Completely implausible.
Further, I’d say without doubt that PFRs are falsely accused of crimes plenty often. PFRs are over-reported and everything else is underreported.
What about false claims? I’ve never heard a registry proponent even mention those, let alone attempt to factor them into their data. A few even say there’s no such thing.
Other than perhaps suicide, what offense isn’t underreported? I can personally vouch that jaywalking, speeding, and using a non-hands-free device while driving, underage drinking, DWI, and a host of other sins of my youth are all underreported.
We’re comparing sex offenses to…jaywalking & speeding?
Sex offenses ARE underreported compared to other criminal offenses. This is well-established, and I’m unaware that even FAC disagrees with this.
It does not follow, though, that RE-offenses by registered sex offenders are underreported. That’s what our opponents get wrong.
They’re also FALSE reported, for example:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/in-the-valley-of-sin-real-story-behind-fake-sex-ring
Considering the standard of proof to convict for sex crime is virtually non-existent (in practice if not in law) and the elimination of statute of limitations, I’m willing to bet there will be a significant increase in false reporting, particularly in high profile cases (read: where there’s a lot of money involved).
And yet, false reporting is never even acknowledged, let alone factored into recidivism statistics or imposition of new “civil regulations.”
@ Jacob re: “Sex offenses ARE underreported compared to other criminal offenses. This is well-established, and I’m unaware that even FAC disagrees with this.”
Well established or well presumed? How can such a thing can be “established.”
It’s certainly asserted by a large number of victim advocates and special interest groups, but what is their evidence? At most, maybe a survey or two that purportedly guarantees confidentiality. But that guarantee just as easily invites dishonesty in responses.
I’m not saying under-reporting doesn’t happen. I just question how those that study these things come up with their figures and wonder if it’s as prevalent as they would have people believe. Frankly, given the manipulation of statistics (such as in Ed C’s example in this thread), I’d bet whatever figures used – which can never be confirmed or denied – are pulled out of thin air to ensure the study’s result matches what was likely predetermined when it was sanctioned.
Because of the wide range of offenses that can be classified as ‘sex offenses’ many are not reported because they are of such a minor nature that the two individuals are able to work it out with just an apology. I once asked a lady friend of mine what would be more traumatic…someone who drops his trousers and exposes his ‘junk’ or someone who puts a gun to her head in a car jacking. You can guess at the answer and yet there is no ‘car jacking’ registry. Sex offenses are relative and what might be a truly traumatic experience for one person might have little to no affect on someone else. I remember years ago when ‘streaking’ was a fad and brought about a good laugh. Today it will be a sex offense and ruin a person’s life. People are different and respond differently to events. When violence is interjected into a sex offense that is when the whole picture changes and society needs to step in and issue punishment. Being on the registry alone should not destroy a person’s life when apology and forgiveness can solve many of the problems.
https://smart.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh231/files/media/document/recidivismofadultsexualoffenders.pdf
That is the link to the report that has all the statistics the reporter used in the story.
Alan
Thank You for the reference.
From what I see you can pretty well read into it whatever you’re looking for. The main problem is people look at the report about rapists and they quote a figure and apply it to sex offender and use the terms interchangeably. The same way with child molester. They many times noted the figure is much higher than stated without any proof to support that statement. If they know something we don’t then give the proof or retract that statement in a report.
Other problems , The very low recidivism rate was established on several thousand subjects whereas the 15 yr. rate was established using 157 subjects. Perhaps the only picked out the worst of the worst to seemingly prove there point.
They admit the definition of recidivism varies GREATLY. From another rape to any sexual offense , or any crime to any accusation of a crime . If you make the barn big enough anybody can hit the broad side of it.
It may not be realistic to try and get an unbiased research but that’s what is needed. But they will never get accurate information as long as they lump a smorgasbord of offenses into one pot stirring it up call it sex offenses and punish all as if they were the worst of the worst.
You are certainly correct regarding the interchangeability of sex offenders. A May 2019 Bureau of Justice Statistics recidivism study does just that. Its headline uses the term “Sex Offenders,” and the term is used throughout the article. One must read the first footnote to see the definition of sex offenders:
‘For this report, “sex offenders” refers to released prisoners whose most serious commitment offense was rape or sexual assault.’
Since I was interested in gleaning statistics, even I did not read the footnote the first time through. Rape and sexual assault? Those crimes represent only a fraction of sex offenders. I’ve seen the study quoted in news articles stating that:
‘Sex offenders were three times as likely as other offenders to be arrested for rape or sexual assault during the 9 years following release.’
More than three times??? (actual figures are 7.7% vs 2.3%) OMG!!! Oh, if you missed the footnote, you could be forgiven for believing that was a general statement about sex offenders rather than only those previously convicted of rape or sexual assault.
Because of the qualifying footnote, this may not be truly disinformation. You can draw your own conclusions, but I believe the report was written to intentionally misinform.
Veritas.
Text of the report:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fox43.com/amp/article/news/investigations/fox43-reveals/megans-law-limitations-fox43-reveals/521-d51ff118-d2ba-4983-9458-34de72c2f00c
Folks – Keep in mind these interviews last for approximately 20 minutes and you hold your breath to see what they use. They do not allow you to view the video or written report before it airs. I would like to interject a couple of things here; we should make a conscious decision to refrain from using the term ‘worst-of-the-worst’ and our registered citizens and families should be commenting and educating on the actual article. Vicki Henry
I wonder if it ever dawned on this daycare owner that her customer base is possibly made up of kids who’s parents are these same registrants?? And I agree with a post from earlier, she needs to be more concerned about those she hires and has contact with these kids on a daily basis. I’ll also add that I tried to find a comment section on the news stations website(couldn’t find one), so I went to their Facebook page, the post there only had two comments. Must not have been that newsworthy in the first place.
Dustin
You are soooo right on. Sad but true.