This article was originally published on July 16, 2015 at lifeonthelist.org
The Constitution’s ex post facto clause prohibits passing a law that retroactively increases the punishment for a criminal act that an offender committed before the law was passed. But in an ingenious 2003 Supreme Court ruling, a 6-3 conservative majority held that retroactive placement on a state sex offender registry–being put on a registry that was created after an offender committed his crime–doesn’t violate ex post facto because registration isn’t punishment.
Daily life for those on state sex offender registries makes that claim hard to square with reality. Nowhere is that more true than in Alabama–registrants in that state are subject to a regime every bit as grinding as that of Cold-War Soviet Russia.
Take the case of 60-year-old Michael McGuire. In 2010, after several decades as a hair stylist and jazz musician in Washington D.C., he decided to move back to his hometown of Montgomery to be with his aging mother and extended family.
He’d committed a serious crime 25 years earlier–he’d raped and assaulted his 30-year-old girlfriend, who he’d been with for five years. He was convicted of sexual assault in a Colorado court and served his full jail term, spending three years locked up and a fourth on parole.
After leaving prison, he got his life back together and had no subsequent arrests or convictions.
When in 2010 he arrived in Montgomery, he took the advice of his brother, a local attorney–he visited the police department to confirm that he wouldn’t be subject to the state’s sex offender laws. His crime, after all, happened 26 years before the state’s passage of its most recent 2011 sex offender law, and he’d never been on a registry in any of the states where he’d lived.
What police told him has sent his life into a tailspin. He’s indeed required to be on the state registry–today his photo, name, and address are on the state website. He can’t live within 2000 feet of schools, parks, or playgrounds, which puts nearly all of the city off limits to him. He pays rent on his and his wife’s apartment but can’t live there because it’s in a banned zone. The same is true for the homes of his other relatives since their apartments and homes are too close to those places where children congregate. He can’t live in a home with children, even though his crime didn’t involve a child.
No one will hire him, and he can’t take music gigs because the law also bans offenders from working within 2000 feet of places where children congregate–all of the venues that have offered him work are in banned zones. In fact, 85 percent of jobs in the city are off limits to registrants. Half of Alabama’s registrants are unemployed, eight times the statewide average.
To travel outside the city, he needs a travel permit, which he can get only by applying in person at the police department.
And as is true for all of the state’s registrants, his driver’s license includes the words CRIMINAL SEX OFFENDER in big red letters.
Today he’s homeless, living under a Montgomery bridge. He’s required to show up in person twice a week at the police department to register by filling out a three-page form. If he misses one appointment, it’s a felony. Alabama’s law requires lifetime registration, and there’s no provision allowing registrants to be removed.
Around the country, thousands like McGuire are on sex offender registries for crimes they committed years before passage of the state laws that created those registries.
In oral arguments during the 2003 Supreme Court ruling, then-lawyer John Roberts (yes, that John Roberts) argued that Alaska’s ex post facto application of its sex offender law should be preserved. Registering with the police four times a year, he said, is much like filling out an application to join Price Club.*
The John Robertses of the world may wish to believe that registration involves just a bit of paperwork. But beliefs aside, the sky really isn’t green, it’s blue. Price Club is to sex offender registration what a hotel room is to a jail cell, what a job interview is to interrogation at a CIA black site, what a conference nametag is to the yellow Star of David badge.
Courts are starting to listen–lawyers and their clients have won cases in state courts in Ohio and Maryland in the last few years. And one day, that 2003 decision, much like Plessy v. Ferguson and Dred Scott v. Sandford, will be upended, standing as a testament to judges’ ability to reach decisions they’re comfortable with, rather than those that fit the facts.
*At another point, Solicitor General Ted Olson defended the law by telling the Justices that the reoffense rate among sex offenders is higher than for other crimes–in fact, the opposite is true.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized on July 16, 2015 by admin.
Registered Former Offenders Restoration Movement (ReFORM), restoring hope, rehabilitation, and reintegration to Alabama's registered citizens
Showing posts with label editorials. Show all posts
Showing posts with label editorials. Show all posts
Sunday, September 13, 2015
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Times Daily: Professors warn about new sex offenders law
The Times Daily has written a few good articles on the subject of sex offenders, and this article is no exception. The only criticism I have is they did not mention the state felt pressured to pass a quick law due to the threat of losing 10% of Byrne/ JAG funds if they failed to comply with SORNA.
http://www.timesdaily.com/article/20110821/news/110829994
J.J. Prescott, University of Michigan Law School professor, and Jonah
E. Rockoff, Columbia University Business School professor, tracked
sexual offender data after states established sex offender registries.
The duo did not study Alabama's new law but analyzed similar laws in
other states for their report.
http://www.timesdaily.com/article/20110821/news/110829994
Professors warn about new sex offenders law
By M.J. Ellington Montgomery Bureau
Published: Sunday, August 21, 2011 at 3:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, August 20, 2011 at 10:38 p.m.
MONTGOMERY - Alabama's new sex offender reporting law is
designed to increase oversight of people who commit sex crimes, but two
researchers warn if the laws are too restrictive, they may backfire and
result in more, not fewer, sex offenses.
Rockoff said states passed stricter
laws hoping to reduce the number of repeat sex offenses and make the
public feel safer. But in a study encompassing several years, he and
Prescott found that such requirements make “sticking to the straight and
narrow much less attractive than just throwing up your hands and
returning to crime,” Prescott said.
He considers the finding significant since the purpose of most of laws is to cut down on repeat crimes.
“Put differently, living life as a convicted sex offender can be pretty miserable under these laws,” Prescott said.
The effect is that the threat of going back to prison for committing new offenses may seem less objectionable than living on the outside under very restrictive rules, he said.
“... Some of these requirements, particularly the ones that involve informing the public about the identity and whereabouts of sex offenders, are so costly to offenders that they become more, rather than less, likely to commit more offenses,” Prescott said.
While Prescott's study did not track Alabama sex offenders, he said it will be extremely difficult for some sex offenders to comply with the new law's requirements. He used Alabama's requirements for homeless sex offenders as an example.
Homeless offenders in Alabama with no fixed residence must report where they are living and pay a $10 registry update fee every seven days. If they do not, they will be sent back prison under the new law, he said.
If the $10 fee stops the offender from reporting because he doesn't have the money and can't get a job because he is an offender, the state will ultimately pay more to keep him in prison. Alabama's cost per inmate per year is about $22,000.
Alabama's new law, based on a bill by Rep. Cam Ward, R-Alabaster, has far-reaching registration and reporting requirements for convicted sex offenders.
“Eighty percent of it was making sure we're in compliance with the” Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, Ward said.
The act, in part, establishes new crimes or expands federal jurisdiction over existing crimes in nine areas, including child abuse, kidnapping, obscenity, child pornography, use of the Internet to distribute obscenity or drugs and record-keeping. It also established new offenses and penalties for failure to register as a sex offender.
The state Department of Public Safety and the Alabama District Attorneys Association asked Ward to sponsor the bill, he said.
Local sheriff's offices and police departments are in training to learn how to enforce the law and many expect to devote at least one person on their staff to keep up with reporting changes. The law does not allocate state funding for enforcement.
Some individuals on the House and Senate committees who took up Ward's bill and a similar House bill by Rep. Blaine Galliher, R-Gadsden, said there was little controversy or discussion about the legislation.
“I was for it. There really wasn't a lot of opposition,” said Rep. Greg Burdine,
D-Florence.
Rep Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, who is an assistant Tuscaloosa city attorney, raised questions in the House Judiciary Committee about the stringent reporting requirements.
In previous years, sex offender legislation, particularly limitations on where offenders can live, prompted concerns from legislators.
Rep. Laura Hall, D-Huntsville, was a House Judiciary Committee member from 2006-10.
She said if the state continues to lengthen the distance between a sex offender's address and community parks, day care facilities or schools, pretty soon there won't be anywhere left for offenders to live.
Jess Brown, political scientist professor at Athens State University, said the thought of sex offenses brings out strong emotions in the public, which often applauds tougher offender restrictions.
Politicians who pass the laws can go home and tell voters they are tough on crime, and few people will voice objections even if they believe the laws may be a mistake, he said.
“There is a belief in America, especially in Alabama, that you can solve a problem with tough-on-crime laws,” Brown said. “But if you continue to have harsh punishment without the likelihood of effective enforcement, then compliance goes down.”
Politics are always a part of the picture with punitive legislation, including three-strikes-and-you're-out laws that also crowd prisons with people who return on technicalities, he said.
“No prosecutor or politician is going to stand up and say we made a mistake with this law,” Brown said. “He doesn't want his opponents to use that against him in the next election.”
M.J. Ellington is the Montgomery Bureau chief for the TimesDaily. She can be reached at mjellington@TimesDaily.com.
He considers the finding significant since the purpose of most of laws is to cut down on repeat crimes.
“Put differently, living life as a convicted sex offender can be pretty miserable under these laws,” Prescott said.
The effect is that the threat of going back to prison for committing new offenses may seem less objectionable than living on the outside under very restrictive rules, he said.
“... Some of these requirements, particularly the ones that involve informing the public about the identity and whereabouts of sex offenders, are so costly to offenders that they become more, rather than less, likely to commit more offenses,” Prescott said.
While Prescott's study did not track Alabama sex offenders, he said it will be extremely difficult for some sex offenders to comply with the new law's requirements. He used Alabama's requirements for homeless sex offenders as an example.
Homeless offenders in Alabama with no fixed residence must report where they are living and pay a $10 registry update fee every seven days. If they do not, they will be sent back prison under the new law, he said.
If the $10 fee stops the offender from reporting because he doesn't have the money and can't get a job because he is an offender, the state will ultimately pay more to keep him in prison. Alabama's cost per inmate per year is about $22,000.
Alabama's new law, based on a bill by Rep. Cam Ward, R-Alabaster, has far-reaching registration and reporting requirements for convicted sex offenders.
“Eighty percent of it was making sure we're in compliance with the” Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, Ward said.
The act, in part, establishes new crimes or expands federal jurisdiction over existing crimes in nine areas, including child abuse, kidnapping, obscenity, child pornography, use of the Internet to distribute obscenity or drugs and record-keeping. It also established new offenses and penalties for failure to register as a sex offender.
The state Department of Public Safety and the Alabama District Attorneys Association asked Ward to sponsor the bill, he said.
Local sheriff's offices and police departments are in training to learn how to enforce the law and many expect to devote at least one person on their staff to keep up with reporting changes. The law does not allocate state funding for enforcement.
Some individuals on the House and Senate committees who took up Ward's bill and a similar House bill by Rep. Blaine Galliher, R-Gadsden, said there was little controversy or discussion about the legislation.
“I was for it. There really wasn't a lot of opposition,” said Rep. Greg Burdine,
D-Florence.
Rep Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, who is an assistant Tuscaloosa city attorney, raised questions in the House Judiciary Committee about the stringent reporting requirements.
In previous years, sex offender legislation, particularly limitations on where offenders can live, prompted concerns from legislators.
Rep. Laura Hall, D-Huntsville, was a House Judiciary Committee member from 2006-10.
She said if the state continues to lengthen the distance between a sex offender's address and community parks, day care facilities or schools, pretty soon there won't be anywhere left for offenders to live.
Jess Brown, political scientist professor at Athens State University, said the thought of sex offenses brings out strong emotions in the public, which often applauds tougher offender restrictions.
Politicians who pass the laws can go home and tell voters they are tough on crime, and few people will voice objections even if they believe the laws may be a mistake, he said.
“There is a belief in America, especially in Alabama, that you can solve a problem with tough-on-crime laws,” Brown said. “But if you continue to have harsh punishment without the likelihood of effective enforcement, then compliance goes down.”
Politics are always a part of the picture with punitive legislation, including three-strikes-and-you're-out laws that also crowd prisons with people who return on technicalities, he said.
“No prosecutor or politician is going to stand up and say we made a mistake with this law,” Brown said. “He doesn't want his opponents to use that against him in the next election.”
M.J. Ellington is the Montgomery Bureau chief for the TimesDaily. She can be reached at mjellington@TimesDaily.com.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
MY VIEW: Penalities for sex offenders out of step
http://blog.al.com/birmingham-news-commentary/2010/05/my_view_penalties_for_sex_offe.html
At the suggestion of a friend, I recently became a volunteer at the Shiloni Transformational Ministry for Homeless Sex Offenders. Shiloni is a faith-based program in Birmingham founded five years ago by Bill and Barbara Grier to help sex offenders after they get out of prison by providing them a temporary place to live while they try to find a job.
The ministry addresses their spiritual and physical needs. All offenders are difficult to help, but sex offenders are more so. Shiloni is the only program of its kind in the entire state.
Recently, the Legislature unanimously passed and the governor signed into law a bill affecting where sex offenders may live. Already, under a prior law, sex offenders cannot live or work less than 3,000 yards from a college, school or day care center.
I believe such constraints are reasonable, but the new law is not.
For example, along with other ill-conceived requirements, the law says no more than one adult criminal sex offender and one unrelated juvenile sex offender can live in the same house, and only one sex offender may live in an apartment complex within 100 yards of the residence of another sex offender.
Basically, the thrust and intent of the law are that sex offenders may not live anywhere.
However Draconian and unfair it may be, it is easy to pass a law in Alabama affecting sex offenders. I believe that if a bill were proposed to brand offenders on the forehead with the letters "SO," it would pass the Legislature unanimously.
Like other people, I thought I knew all I needed to know about sex offenders: Put them in prison and throw away the key. Case closed.
It is not that easy. We think we know what a sex offender is, but we do not. What do a 17-year-old boy having consensual sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend, a streaker, and a drunk, naked frat boy rolling around on the front lawn of his fraternity house shouting "Roll Tide" have in common?
According to Alabama law, they are all "sex offenders." Once arrested and found guilty, they are branded for life.
The streaker and the drunk frat boy are easily dismissed, but the two teenagers are not. Alabama law holds that a girl under the age of 16 cannot agree to consensual sex with a boy older than she is; therefore, the boy is a rapist and a sex offender.
Ridiculous? Think again. I know such a boy in the Shiloni program. Mom and dad get mad, and the boy gets jail.
Or, consider "Brad." Brad's father left when he was 1 month old. He was later molested by his half-sister's husband. When he was 14, his mother suddenly died. Brad was alone and an emotional wreck.
He then started acting out sexually. He was arrested and sent to the state juvenile detention center at Mt. Meigs, where his life was saved. However, when Brad was released at age 18, he was branded as a sex offender.
One person I will never forget was a 53-year-old man who had consensual sex with an underage girl. Having been a missionary and a pastor, he was stricken with guilt at his sin and turned himself in to police. He knew it was wrong in the sight of God.
None of his past life's goodness and his deep remorse was taken into consideration at his sentencing. He was given 30 years.
When sex offenders are released, if they have not found a place to live within three days, they are arrested and put back in jail. This is not morally right. They have served their sentence and committed no additional crime. They are in a catch-22 situation.
What we should be concerned about are real sex offenders -- the predators, the pedophiles and the serial rapists who cannot be rehabilitated.
The biggest barriers sex offenders face when they are released are finding a place to live and finding a job. The Shiloni ministry helps with these two needs. Providing a place for sex offenders to live is a huge problem because, understandably, no one wants them in his backyard.
Without a lot of fanfare, well-intentioned people representing the city, the county and their respective police forces should be able to work together to find an appropriate place for a shelter.
Bill and Barbara Grier have put their hearts and souls into helping sex offenders. They have spent endless hours and thousands of their own dollars to sustain their ministry. They are what I call "special people" who have been tapped on the shoulder by God. They need help both in goodwill and in financial support.
Shiloni is just one program. There should be more like it.
Cecil M. Jones Jr. of Cahaba Heights is a retired social services director. E-mail: cecilmjones@gmail.com.
MY VIEW: Penalties for sex offenders out of step
By Special to The Birmingham News
May 16, 2010, 5:35AM
By CECIL M. JONES JR.A
The ministry addresses their spiritual and physical needs. All offenders are difficult to help, but sex offenders are more so. Shiloni is the only program of its kind in the entire state.
Recently, the Legislature unanimously passed and the governor signed into law a bill affecting where sex offenders may live. Already, under a prior law, sex offenders cannot live or work less than 3,000 yards from a college, school or day care center.
I believe such constraints are reasonable, but the new law is not.
For example, along with other ill-conceived requirements, the law says no more than one adult criminal sex offender and one unrelated juvenile sex offender can live in the same house, and only one sex offender may live in an apartment complex within 100 yards of the residence of another sex offender.
Basically, the thrust and intent of the law are that sex offenders may not live anywhere.
However Draconian and unfair it may be, it is easy to pass a law in Alabama affecting sex offenders. I believe that if a bill were proposed to brand offenders on the forehead with the letters "SO," it would pass the Legislature unanimously.
Like other people, I thought I knew all I needed to know about sex offenders: Put them in prison and throw away the key. Case closed.
It is not that easy. We think we know what a sex offender is, but we do not. What do a 17-year-old boy having consensual sex with his 15-year-old girlfriend, a streaker, and a drunk, naked frat boy rolling around on the front lawn of his fraternity house shouting "Roll Tide" have in common?
According to Alabama law, they are all "sex offenders." Once arrested and found guilty, they are branded for life.
The streaker and the drunk frat boy are easily dismissed, but the two teenagers are not. Alabama law holds that a girl under the age of 16 cannot agree to consensual sex with a boy older than she is; therefore, the boy is a rapist and a sex offender.
Ridiculous? Think again. I know such a boy in the Shiloni program. Mom and dad get mad, and the boy gets jail.
Or, consider "Brad." Brad's father left when he was 1 month old. He was later molested by his half-sister's husband. When he was 14, his mother suddenly died. Brad was alone and an emotional wreck.
He then started acting out sexually. He was arrested and sent to the state juvenile detention center at Mt. Meigs, where his life was saved. However, when Brad was released at age 18, he was branded as a sex offender.
One person I will never forget was a 53-year-old man who had consensual sex with an underage girl. Having been a missionary and a pastor, he was stricken with guilt at his sin and turned himself in to police. He knew it was wrong in the sight of God.
None of his past life's goodness and his deep remorse was taken into consideration at his sentencing. He was given 30 years.
When sex offenders are released, if they have not found a place to live within three days, they are arrested and put back in jail. This is not morally right. They have served their sentence and committed no additional crime. They are in a catch-22 situation.
What we should be concerned about are real sex offenders -- the predators, the pedophiles and the serial rapists who cannot be rehabilitated.
The biggest barriers sex offenders face when they are released are finding a place to live and finding a job. The Shiloni ministry helps with these two needs. Providing a place for sex offenders to live is a huge problem because, understandably, no one wants them in his backyard.
Without a lot of fanfare, well-intentioned people representing the city, the county and their respective police forces should be able to work together to find an appropriate place for a shelter.
Bill and Barbara Grier have put their hearts and souls into helping sex offenders. They have spent endless hours and thousands of their own dollars to sustain their ministry. They are what I call "special people" who have been tapped on the shoulder by God. They need help both in goodwill and in financial support.
Shiloni is just one program. There should be more like it.
© 2010 al.com. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)