There is something deeply troubling to me about this story. Clearly the acts that are perpetrated by sex offenders is awful. Just about the worst kind of crime you see in this country. The effects of their crimes linger on and on, over many generations. And yet I find myself agonizing over the system in our country of dealing with the criminal. If we have a system of punishment, then it would seem that once a punishment is doled out and met, that should be it. Yes, I realize that the victim still suffers, but our system of laws, trials and prisons has never been set up to make victims whole again. Rather it has chosen appropriate punishments for various crimes. Murder, robbing banks, shoplifting, sex crimes; they all have their set punishments along with set lengths for the convicted to be incarcerated. So deeply down, my fear is that we have decided as a nation, that there is no way at all to treat or cure a sex offender. That their personality is such that they cannot ever control themselves. Have we not done any meaningful research to find a way to treat those poor, ugly, souls with any hope for them living productive lives? Do we even care? There MUST be someone trying some kind of treatment for these people. Or have we just decided as a nation that we hate them enough to hold them in prolonged commitment without any hope. This is truly awful. For everyone. There are no winners here. At all.
1
As author Linda Fairstein, a former sex crimes prosecutor, wrote in her book "Sexual Violence: Our War Against Rape," these guys (most of them are men) cannot be cured. The need to be locked up for life. I believe she wrote it didn't matter if they were locked up in the Waldorf-Astoria, for the safety of the rest of us, they needed to be kept out of circulation.
7
Prisoners of all types should work for their keep. It should not be a retirement home or some place they look back on fondly. They should also pay back the state for the cost of incarceration. Why is everyone else paying it? Then they should pay for all the costs of the victims professional help that they need to try to get on track and punitive damages for the years that are lost because of trauma and PTSD. The punishment should be only going one way and that is against the perpetrator not on society or the victim. They need to pay their ENTIRE debt for what they have cost society and the victim and feel the full weight of it.
This should take 20 to 40 years out of their lives and then we can talk about whether or not they can re-enter society. If they do re-enter they know they paid the true price and it was painful.
This should take 20 to 40 years out of their lives and then we can talk about whether or not they can re-enter society. If they do re-enter they know they paid the true price and it was painful.
4
I worked in mental health for more than 25 years , and saw my share of sexual offenders of all stripes. A reasonably simple solution that never seems to get discussed in any depth involves that taboo subject, castration, either chemical or actual. I would like to see some real data on how many offenders reoffend, once they have been castrated. If it is as low as I believe it is, then it should be offered as a meaningful treatment option for offenders who are determined to change their lives and move on. It could go a long way to emptying the prisons and storing lives.
4
Exactly right.
1
Now we care. We're coming to this realization a little late, don't you think?
It angers me to see the double standard for drug use right before our eyes. People (white) who are walking into police stations with needles and avoiding arrest?
The system is so unbalanced it sickens me. We know drug use is prevalent in all communities, rich and poor, black and white. But the discrepencies are truly astounding. As Michelle Alexander writes, the official drug war is truly the new Jim Crow era. And for the most part, white communities are treated with kid gloves while black communities feel the full brunt of of the law.
It angers me to see the double standard for drug use right before our eyes. People (white) who are walking into police stations with needles and avoiding arrest?
The system is so unbalanced it sickens me. We know drug use is prevalent in all communities, rich and poor, black and white. But the discrepencies are truly astounding. As Michelle Alexander writes, the official drug war is truly the new Jim Crow era. And for the most part, white communities are treated with kid gloves while black communities feel the full brunt of of the law.
They don't like being detained? Neither do I. I don't like being detained by a rapist on my way home from the bus stop. I don't like being detained in my errands by the need to protect a younger woman from a sexual aggressor. I didn't like being detained at a party by a pedophile man. How dangerous men have to be in order to be judged "abnormal" in a society where men are routinely act out their violent sexual hatreds and confusions on the bodies of women and children.
6
Keep 'em out of the neighborhood.
1
Sex offenders should be dealt with exclusively through the criminal justice system. Sex offender civil commitment diverts valuable resources away from those mentally ill people who need them the most. General civil commitment laws allow for the commitment of those people found to have a mental illness and who are dangerous. To single out a group, even one as reviled as sex offenders, for special civil commitment, sets a dangerous precedent.
5
Either give sex offenders prison terms of life without parole or release them after they serve their sentence. We release murderers who re-offend. Some sexual assaults can be horrific but none are worse than being murdered, I would think.
And what sort of sex offenses are some of these people guilty of? I once 'mooned' a car load of girls when I was in high school back in the 60's. One girl went to the police who pretty much laughed it off, as they should have. What might have happened to me in today's environment? I shudder to think!
Parents, today, have been charged with child pornography for texting a picture of their toddler, naked in the bathtub. Thirty years ago, these pictures were just thought of as 'cute'.
Of course there are seriously ill sex offenders who will continue to re-offend but the answers are not black and white.
And what sort of sex offenses are some of these people guilty of? I once 'mooned' a car load of girls when I was in high school back in the 60's. One girl went to the police who pretty much laughed it off, as they should have. What might have happened to me in today's environment? I shudder to think!
Parents, today, have been charged with child pornography for texting a picture of their toddler, naked in the bathtub. Thirty years ago, these pictures were just thought of as 'cute'.
Of course there are seriously ill sex offenders who will continue to re-offend but the answers are not black and white.
4
• They are being held here indefinitely under a policy known as CIVIL COMMITMENT....*
“Language is a critical part of how the government rationalizes and normalizes its policies.”
~ JESSE WEGMAN
New York Times editorial writer on legal affairs
THE NEW YORK TIMES: September 25, 2015
* Emphasis mine.
“Language is a critical part of how the government rationalizes and normalizes its policies.”
~ JESSE WEGMAN
New York Times editorial writer on legal affairs
THE NEW YORK TIMES: September 25, 2015
* Emphasis mine.
3
The problem with these arguments is that we confuse teenagers that were caught sleeping together with people who are predators. Predators should NEVER get out of prison. If you can be legally held accountable for sexual assault, you should not get out of prison.
That being said, the affirmative consent nonsense coming out of california is a travesty of justice. We are going to have to accept that in most cases rape comes down to one person's words over another. We should reserve prison for cases where its very clear the line was crossed.
That being said, the affirmative consent nonsense coming out of california is a travesty of justice. We are going to have to accept that in most cases rape comes down to one person's words over another. We should reserve prison for cases where its very clear the line was crossed.
5
The violent offenders should be removed from society....forever. Feed them, house them, give them medical assistance, but never let them go back into civilized society again. Then try to civilize the less violent, if we are unable to do that, put them in with the first group. These people should never be allowed to harm another person.
5
It's fascinating that none of these men have expressed gratitude for not being executed for their crimes.
4
Lets stop calling this practice "civil commitment," implying actual treatment, and lets call it what it really is-- indefinite detention a la Abu Ghraib. These places offer no real treatment because the program is intended to merely create the facade of treatment so it can bypass the US Constitution and detain people long past their prison sentences. Without a doubt, the prison will use the most extreme example they can find to justify the existence of the program, but in reality, few individuals in the program are repeat, violent offenders. The standards for commitment were lowered in 1997 thanks to Kansas v Hendricks, and we are seeing the end result.
5
When it's safe for them to go home? It will never be safe for them to go home, and we will never feel safe having them come home.
Sex offenders are much like an alcoholic. If you place an alcoholic into a bar day in, and day out, they will eventually cave to their desire...alcohol. The same is true for sex offenders. Placing them into an environment filled with children, day in, and day out, will eventually lead to them caving to their desire...children.
The only acceptable home for a sex offender, is either prison or a secured halfway house.
Sex offenders are much like an alcoholic. If you place an alcoholic into a bar day in, and day out, they will eventually cave to their desire...alcohol. The same is true for sex offenders. Placing them into an environment filled with children, day in, and day out, will eventually lead to them caving to their desire...children.
The only acceptable home for a sex offender, is either prison or a secured halfway house.
3
Would that apply to an alcoholic as well. Put them in prison or half-way house or how about a drug dealer who feeds on the weakness or teens. You know hundreds more teens die from drug overdose. Most Sexual Offenders respond very well to treatment and never re-offend.
2
It's asinine that it costs $125,000/year to house and 'treat' these sex offenders. It seems the treatment is not effective, otherwise they would not need to be held so long. Having said that, I think men over 70, particularly men with less physical capacity, should be released and monitored, particularly if that helps to maintain the program.
Beyond that, in the absence of effective treatment, sex offenders need to remain out of circulation. Perhaps there is some other secure facility where sex offenders can be held where they can also work to help off-set the cost of their housing and treatment. I'm thinking of a military base where they can work but be housed separate from others.
Beyond that, in the absence of effective treatment, sex offenders need to remain out of circulation. Perhaps there is some other secure facility where sex offenders can be held where they can also work to help off-set the cost of their housing and treatment. I'm thinking of a military base where they can work but be housed separate from others.
1
Maybe you were not reading... They are not held there because of the success of treatment, they are being held to keep them out of society. This is done without any due process. Sexual Offenders who receive good treatment are high on the list to not re-offend. And if you think Sex Offenders are bad, think about all the drug addicts they are letting out of prison who were selling drugs to kids some of which are now 6 feet under.
3
People can stay away from drug users.And they want to stay away from you if you don't do drugs. You can avoid them. You can't avoid a predator of sex. They lurk in libraries, parking garages, office buildings, etc....
According to a major study I found online, 22% of released rapists commit another rape within 4 to 5 years. 12% of nonviolent sexual offenders commit similar offenses within 4 to 5 years. These figures seem low. I had thought that most sex offensdere would be repeat offenders. One more way in which I find that I my ignorance of human sexuality is colossal..
4
The rate of recidivism is 3.5 percent. The higher rates include crimes other than sexual that the offender committed.
3
It seems obvious that the professionals who administer treatment for sex offenders are tacitly admitting to the fact that, except for the obviously socio- or psychopathic individual, there is no clear criteria for what can be deemed as successful rehabilitation for the crime. It begs an important question: "What is the criteria for the successful rehabilitation for any crime?" Can there be such a confident criteria? Therefore, incarcerate the violent for their violence as you would any violent criminal. Then, release them as you would any violent criminal. The fact that they are "sex offenders" should matter only insofar as they are punished for their crime. Likewise, repeat offenders should be treated as any repeat offender commensurate with their crime. In other words, the fact that their crimes are of a "sexual" nature should not subject them to enhanced punitive measures. It seems somewhat 17th century to me to treat them so.
6
You don't think that the fact that the crimes are "of a sexual nature" adds to the gravity and heinousness of the offense? As does the fact that some of the victims are children? Doesn't that in turn require enhanced punitive measures? Like, for instance, when people are subjected to enhanced punitive measures because their crimes are of a "homicidal" nature?
2
Sex offenders should be dealt with in the criminal justice system. Housing them under the guise of "treatment" diverts funds meant for mentally ill people away from the mentally ill people who need them most. Every state has a civil commitment law for people who have a mental illness and are dangerous. Singling out special groups for civil commitment, even a group as reviled as sex offenders, sets a dangerous precedent.
6
When the Constitution was written people were hung for these offenses. Thus, those people citing the Constitution should keep that in mind. These people are being held because they are highly probable to go destroy another life and the States do not believe the length of detainment was sufficient. These are the worst crimes committed.
3
Why don't they hold Drug dealers and murderers to the same standard. They actually kill people. You can kill someone and be out in 7 years, no questions asked. Fair is Fair. What about Corporate executives who have robbed people to the point of destroying their lives... Should they walk to do it again.
2
Did the NYT not think to mention that civil incarceration for dangerous sex offenders who pose too great a threat to be released has been ruled constitutional by SCOTUS? Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (1997).
5
Some people fit in a civilized society and some don't. We need to accept that hard reality. Three points: get rid of the prude laws that classify hijinks as sex-offenses. Pass the Romeo-Juliet law and let the young be young, Finally,for the rest, exercise capital punishment and apply liberally.
1
When I was a social work student, one of my advisors worked with male pedophiles for a time in his career. He said that the recidivism rate was very high and the rap against them that they were untreatable because of their deeply embedded sexual pathologies, was, as far as he was concerned, mostly true. This is one of the most treatment-resistant groups of people in society. Keeping them apart is probably a good idea.
5
The point is these people are emotionally ill. They never should have been in jail. They should have been put in a treatment center with intense counseling. The stupid states don't do this, and thus end up facing avoidable problems, in at least some cases, upon their release from jail. This country is totally backward in its treatment of many types of offenders of the law, including certain drug dealers, mentally ill people, and sex offenders. Let's get with it. It's an embarrassment and it is ignorant. It costs more money and is inhumane and not effective to blanket throw everyone in jail, regardless of the law that the person breaks.
1
And murderers aren't ill? I can't think of a single crime that deserves punishment - severe - more than child rape.
2
A guy who rapes 66 women should be sent to prison--for life. How does he have any right to reenter the community?
3
If sex offenders are irredeemably dangerous and can not be released back to society then it should be reflected in longer less negotiable prison sentences. You shouldn't rely on civil confinement to do the job of the criminal justice system
utilizing bogus treatment facilities with relapse prevention groups that third graders could pay lip service to. This smacks of the old soviet unions use of psychiatric facilities to deal with dissidents. You can do all the annual risk assessments that you want but no sane psychologist is going to put their name on an evaluation proclaiming someone is safe for reintegration. Treatment can be provided in conjunction with incarceration. Those who thrive in treatment can be paroled into community supervision with stringent requirements of where they live including the use of door alarms and ankle bracelets.A therapist in conjunction with specialized parole agents can determine the success of the re integrative process and loosen or tighten community restraints. This strikes me as the fairest way to balance community safety with individual rights of individuals who have served their time.
utilizing bogus treatment facilities with relapse prevention groups that third graders could pay lip service to. This smacks of the old soviet unions use of psychiatric facilities to deal with dissidents. You can do all the annual risk assessments that you want but no sane psychologist is going to put their name on an evaluation proclaiming someone is safe for reintegration. Treatment can be provided in conjunction with incarceration. Those who thrive in treatment can be paroled into community supervision with stringent requirements of where they live including the use of door alarms and ankle bracelets.A therapist in conjunction with specialized parole agents can determine the success of the re integrative process and loosen or tighten community restraints. This strikes me as the fairest way to balance community safety with individual rights of individuals who have served their time.
1
Wow, can't believe some of th comments here.
There has to be some room for circumstances.
An example mentioned of a person with 60 offenses ?
That one should have gotten the death penatly long ago.
He said she said one time convict, give them a second chance.
Where to draw the line is tough, but it definitely has to be somewhere between those two.
There has to be some room for circumstances.
An example mentioned of a person with 60 offenses ?
That one should have gotten the death penatly long ago.
He said she said one time convict, give them a second chance.
Where to draw the line is tough, but it definitely has to be somewhere between those two.
1
For every child rape, an accused is currently thought to have already gotten away with 10 previous rapes. This is a crime that hides in the darkness as children are too terrified to come forward, often being told that their family will be killed if they do, and that they will never be believed.
3
Evaluate them in prison, and put the worst adult offenders on hormonal castration. Give them talk therapy, and as their sentence expires, ask them would they like to remain on the hormones for the rest of their lives, or even be surgically castrated, and be freed. No coercion. They may feel enough of a sense of relief, freedom from sexual urges, new self control, to say yes. These men are prisoners of their own aberrant sex drives.
1
Rape is a crime of control and power. Castration does little to prevent future rapes.
3
The problem is that, except in the very rare case, sex offenders canNOT be "reformed" and anyone who works closely with them knows this. Releasing them back into society almost guarantees that there will be more victims. Does Judge Frank want these individuals living next to his children and grandchildren? I think not. Neither do any of us.
One victim's mother states it perfectly: "Tragically, there are going to be people who have to live in fear that those who chose to perpetrate are quite possibly going to be released back into the society,” Ms. Walker said. “The predators are driving the bus here. We need to focus more on the victims. What about the rights of the victims?”
What about the victims and society's safety at large? Let's look at it that way. Sex offenders should not ever be allowed back in society. And please don't give me "oh the poor 18 year old who slept w his 16 year old girlfriend" sympathy story. I mean sex offenders: people who rape children and women repeatedly and with no regard for human life. Keep them locked away forever. That's justice for the rest of us.
Make the original sentencing for rape as high and long as for murder (life) and then you don't have this halfway house dilemma.
One victim's mother states it perfectly: "Tragically, there are going to be people who have to live in fear that those who chose to perpetrate are quite possibly going to be released back into the society,” Ms. Walker said. “The predators are driving the bus here. We need to focus more on the victims. What about the rights of the victims?”
What about the victims and society's safety at large? Let's look at it that way. Sex offenders should not ever be allowed back in society. And please don't give me "oh the poor 18 year old who slept w his 16 year old girlfriend" sympathy story. I mean sex offenders: people who rape children and women repeatedly and with no regard for human life. Keep them locked away forever. That's justice for the rest of us.
Make the original sentencing for rape as high and long as for murder (life) and then you don't have this halfway house dilemma.
4
Once a sex offender, always a sex offender. These merciless and unrepentant rapists and child predators, who couldn't care less about their victims, can whine all they want. Theirs is a sickness that can never be cured. Lock them up and throw away the keys.
6
Someone tried to have sexual contact with me when I was 12 or so. He said he was also doing it with his sisters. Not full sex. I should have told my parents but I didn't. I didn't let him touch me and after that I avoided going to the bedrooms when I went to his house with my parents.
That was decades ago. He had some problems with alcoholism but I never heard anything about his being accused of anything criminal as an adult.
That was decades ago. He had some problems with alcoholism but I never heard anything about his being accused of anything criminal as an adult.
Too many nineteen and twenty year olds find themselves labeled for life as a sex offender for having had sex with girls just under the legal age. This can ruin a perhaps marginal young man's life. It also means that the sex offender label loses its usefulness and that criminals who prey on children are able to continue their crimes.
die unlhaving nThese laws
die unlhaving nThese laws
6
How can we best protect our women and children? They are the vulnerable and preyed upon in most cases. And they are preyed upon by men in many cases.
How do we protect society from Sexual predators? This should be the main concern, not the desires and wishes of the criminals.
How do we protect society from Sexual predators? This should be the main concern, not the desires and wishes of the criminals.
4
If psychiatrists have determined that these sexual offenders are likely to re-offend, and we have seen the tragic results this, then it's not safe to let them back into society. The purpose of keeping them in a facility is not punitive, it's for protection. Why seek the advice of medical professionals, and then disregard their advice because of political or financial expediency?
It's not that I don't have sympathy for the offenders. If it is a mental defect, then it could be any one of our sons or daughters. I have great sympathy for the families of the offenders. Give them an opportunity to be productive and live a life with purpose, but keep them locked away from those they might harm.
It's not that I don't have sympathy for the offenders. If it is a mental defect, then it could be any one of our sons or daughters. I have great sympathy for the families of the offenders. Give them an opportunity to be productive and live a life with purpose, but keep them locked away from those they might harm.
5
I look to history, and then realize everything has limits. When our society realizes that there is no help for sex offenders, and decides that execution is the only way to prevent another child from being victimized, it will be the start of something better.
1
Because no one is ever wrongly convicted, right?
The entire way sexual offenses are dealt with in this country needs reform. Firstly, separate non-violent (streaking, etc) and violent sexual offenses and punish them accordingly rather than lumping them together. Secondly, pass Romeo and Juliet laws so that 18-year olds are not put in jail for having sex with 17-year olds. Allow non-violent sex-offenders to remove themselves from the registry after, say, 5 years without any incidents.
14
Most pedophiles are not "violent" in the way we as a society define violent: largely they do not break the children's bones, bruise them or leave other physical evidence. This is intentional, because pedophiles know violence of that nature is what you can prosecute them on.
The violence pedophiles commit against children is so profound and often endures a lifetime for the victims, but it is that violence which cannot be seen by a judge nor the public (and therefore not be prosecuted as our laws stand) which is the great tragedy.
My point is take care in how you define "violence" or "violent sex offenders" and let's think about reforming laws to recognize and prosecute the harmful violence against the victims which is not often evident by blood or broken bones or corpses.
The violence pedophiles commit against children is so profound and often endures a lifetime for the victims, but it is that violence which cannot be seen by a judge nor the public (and therefore not be prosecuted as our laws stand) which is the great tragedy.
My point is take care in how you define "violence" or "violent sex offenders" and let's think about reforming laws to recognize and prosecute the harmful violence against the victims which is not often evident by blood or broken bones or corpses.
1
I don't think you read the article. Only violent sex offenders are sent to this 'remote facility.' Not that I agree, but I'm wondering if these guys were that dangerous, why were they removed from jail? Maybe because it was dangerous to have them in jail? Violent sex offenders are very difficult to treat and are, unfortunately, rarely cured.
The judicial system gets stuck with all the people who are sex offenders. They will re-offend as soon as they get out of prison. The mentally ill are also dumped on the judicial system to manage since the relatives and doctors cannot control them. Sex offenders should remain in jail. The mentally ill who are dangerous to the community should also remain in jail, since the ACLU won't let mental hospitals house them. We have to warehouse the dangerous people who commit crimes, no matter what their mental state, to protect the innocent.
5
So your idea of doing something is allowing all these to remain in jail or in a jail-like setting?
That's not a solution. One, you and I have to pay for all this incarceration and I would think not all of these convicts have done violent rapes.
The way our legal system is, the ones without the means to pay usually get the higher jail terms.
So what's the answer?
Our mental health system definitely has to improve and the ACLU definitely has to allow the chronically mentally ill less freedoms to do as they please or want.
As for those that have completed their sentences, our society has to deal with what we want in protection from these former felons.
That's not a solution. One, you and I have to pay for all this incarceration and I would think not all of these convicts have done violent rapes.
The way our legal system is, the ones without the means to pay usually get the higher jail terms.
So what's the answer?
Our mental health system definitely has to improve and the ACLU definitely has to allow the chronically mentally ill less freedoms to do as they please or want.
As for those that have completed their sentences, our society has to deal with what we want in protection from these former felons.
One of the big problems with our system is that we don't know what we want from it. We speak of rehabilitation, but we never really trust that to work. We demand the punishment fit the crime, but we worry that the punishment is no deterrent. And what a lot of people actually want is for criminals to be removed from society completely.
Our system does not do any of these things, at least not properly--most prisons are simply a place to house, not treat or punish, criminals, and most criminals get released back into society (though they carry the title of felon, which makes life harder). If the system is to work, simply housing criminals with other criminals for a set period with very limited privileges is not enough. In my opinion, we should be striving to make criminals into contributing members of society.
That means treatment. If you believe someone cannot control their sexual urges, I must wonder about your level of self-control. Humans can control their actions, even when they have thoughts that may run contrary to the norm. No one acts on every impulse. Why then, should a sex offender be unable to learn self-control?
Our system does not do any of these things, at least not properly--most prisons are simply a place to house, not treat or punish, criminals, and most criminals get released back into society (though they carry the title of felon, which makes life harder). If the system is to work, simply housing criminals with other criminals for a set period with very limited privileges is not enough. In my opinion, we should be striving to make criminals into contributing members of society.
That means treatment. If you believe someone cannot control their sexual urges, I must wonder about your level of self-control. Humans can control their actions, even when they have thoughts that may run contrary to the norm. No one acts on every impulse. Why then, should a sex offender be unable to learn self-control?
13
I take it you've never met a serial sex offender.
1
Drew: Do you not realize that there are many, many people that can not exercise the necessary self control for their "addiction". Sexual assault it like smoking, or alcohol or drugs.
1
"Why then, should a sex offender be unable to learn self-control?"
Compulsion: n. an irresistible urge to behave in a certain way, especially against one's conscious wishes.
Compulsions are not learned behaviors or mere "impulses". Even if treatment shifts a sexual offenders moral compass to align it with society's, the compulsion remains. The very definition itself emphasizes that compulsions are "irresistible" and "against one's conscious wishes." If, as many people believe, the nature of a sexual offender's illness has risen to the level of a compulsion, treatment is merely rolling the dice that they can hold out long enough against an irresistible mental force longer (hopefully until death). The odds are not good. When an alcoholic relapses, they generally wind up harming themselves. If a sex offender relapses, the damage is greater, maybe even spanning a generation. That's a pretty big dice roll.
Compulsion: n. an irresistible urge to behave in a certain way, especially against one's conscious wishes.
Compulsions are not learned behaviors or mere "impulses". Even if treatment shifts a sexual offenders moral compass to align it with society's, the compulsion remains. The very definition itself emphasizes that compulsions are "irresistible" and "against one's conscious wishes." If, as many people believe, the nature of a sexual offender's illness has risen to the level of a compulsion, treatment is merely rolling the dice that they can hold out long enough against an irresistible mental force longer (hopefully until death). The odds are not good. When an alcoholic relapses, they generally wind up harming themselves. If a sex offender relapses, the damage is greater, maybe even spanning a generation. That's a pretty big dice roll.
1
There is so much that does not work in our system with these methods. Generally we do not incarcerate people for what the might do in the future; we have sentencing guidelines with minimum and maximum sentences for a reason; people who complete their sentence (their "debt to society") are usually released. If states think that longer incarceration is necessary for a subset of criminals, then the laws should be changed so that they have a definite time frame. They can still be transferred to a treatment facility at some point in that term.
I hear what the victims are saying, but in no other crime, not even where death is involved, does victim's fear or comfort determine that a perpetrator will be locked up indefinitely. As to officials being 'blamed' if the offender re offends, that is also a risk with any crime. Again, let the laws be changed to create longer, clearly defined sentences (up to and including life in prison) for the most heinous crimes.
I hear what the victims are saying, but in no other crime, not even where death is involved, does victim's fear or comfort determine that a perpetrator will be locked up indefinitely. As to officials being 'blamed' if the offender re offends, that is also a risk with any crime. Again, let the laws be changed to create longer, clearly defined sentences (up to and including life in prison) for the most heinous crimes.
8
How many children's lives would have to be ruined before you'd categorise child rape as 'heinous'? I'll go with one.
1
The state cannot treat mental illness. Private therapists have tried for years to deal with the worst emotional conditions, and they are getting nowhere. Drugs will turn them into zombies, but drugs will not access the patient's inner drive system and affect change. That is not going to happen. A sociopath that will rape, molest, and threaten is not going to change - with a lifetime of treatment. Some suggest castration. Castration might end the threat in some of them, but we cannot be even certain of that. And there is no way to test these sociopaths.
18
That's why they should be kept locked away forever from the rest of society. That's what prison is for.
1
From the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution:
“…nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”
The Bill of Rights means something only when we uphold its principles for people we don’t otherwise feel much sympathy for. That people are being forcibly detained for ‘treatment’ for 20 years after fully serving a criminal sentence simply fails the straight face test as far as the 5th Amendment. The ‘treatment program’ is an expensive sham that the State has perpetuated so they can continue the incarceration of people they otherwise could not legally hold in prison.
Another Catch-22 of the program is that in order to demonstrate participation in treatment the ‘patients’ have to catalog their sexual conduct. Take the case of Mr. Bolte, convicted of one case at trial but who acknowledged more crimes while in treatment. Ergo, you can’t demonstrate compliance with the program without waiving your 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination. The more misconduct you confess the more dangerous you are deemed to be. The more dangerous you are, the more treatment you require. One could logically conclude that the more you comply with treatment the more time you will spend locked up.
“…nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”
The Bill of Rights means something only when we uphold its principles for people we don’t otherwise feel much sympathy for. That people are being forcibly detained for ‘treatment’ for 20 years after fully serving a criminal sentence simply fails the straight face test as far as the 5th Amendment. The ‘treatment program’ is an expensive sham that the State has perpetuated so they can continue the incarceration of people they otherwise could not legally hold in prison.
Another Catch-22 of the program is that in order to demonstrate participation in treatment the ‘patients’ have to catalog their sexual conduct. Take the case of Mr. Bolte, convicted of one case at trial but who acknowledged more crimes while in treatment. Ergo, you can’t demonstrate compliance with the program without waiving your 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination. The more misconduct you confess the more dangerous you are deemed to be. The more dangerous you are, the more treatment you require. One could logically conclude that the more you comply with treatment the more time you will spend locked up.
16
And the Constitution implies life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That means children and women have more rights than a twisted sexual deviants, therefore execution of those who try to take one's life, liberty, or happiness!
3
"What about the rights of the victims?”
6
Maybe you can convince yourself things are that simple, but that doesn't make it so.
How about let the families of the victims have them after their prison sentences are over. Sex offenders I don't think can be treated like they have a cold or the flu. They are what they are.That is their preference,to do whatever filthy disgusting act that they went to prison for. I don't think you can change that. Some of these people if not all of them don't deserve to see the outside of an institution. But if they're looking for ways to deal with the problem let the families of the victims have them and there will be no more problems after that. I'm sure after I post this comment all the liberals on here are going to start saying that these people have rights too. Tell that to the victims of the families of the children that these pedophiles molested and raped before you think about what kind of rights these animals have. They had rights before they decided to rape and molest and violate people. I would love to get my hands on the guy that hurt my child just one time.
15
If you feel that way, then you need to have the sentences changed on these offenses to reflect that. Until that is done, once a person has served his sentence, he should be released.
7
Let us get a bit creative here as well as save some public dollars and lives. There is an individual with the label of a convicted pedophile, yet he lives in his own home in a typical neighborhood with his partner and works with 24/7 line of sight supervision. How could this take place? He works at a restaurant where his supervising staff sits at the waiting area and reads a paper as he feigns to be a customer. The individual is also fully supervised at his home by having bars on all windows and a single entrance. the night supervisor spends his time in the living room keeping watch over the only exit in the house.
Outcomes? Higher quality of life for the individual and lower costs to the taxpayer. Why do we keep locking people up as a solution to anything?
Outcomes? Higher quality of life for the individual and lower costs to the taxpayer. Why do we keep locking people up as a solution to anything?
3
This is a nearly impossible dream you have set up. Creativity is wonderful but the reality of it is most of these released convicts are not owning homes that can be barred up in the windows. Who is paying for the fake customer's food bill? Do you know how many individual workers that would require? You would need someone to take the place of workers when sick, on vacation, multiple shifts, etc...for watching one person. It is just not economically feasible. If you have bars on windows and a watchmen it's still a prison, just a prison for a single prisoner.
8
Why do we lock people up? Because raping a child is so heinous that the perp deserves - that's right deserves - to lose his freedom for foisting a living death on a child.
2
If the Minnesota system costs $120,000 per inmate, other options might very well be feasible. And how about electronic monitoring?
"...Donovan W. Frank, of Federal District Court in St. Paul, on Thursday ordered the state to promptly conduct independent risk and treatment assessments on everyone being detained, to seek releases or ease restrictions in appropriate cases, and to begin conducting annual assessments to determine whether everyone here still meets the legal requirements for civil commitment."
"...critics of Minnesota’s civil commitment program say it is focused more on warehousing and punishing people than on treating them."
from society's view, it should be worthwhile to warehouse and to punish people when criminals are still deemed as "sexually dangerous" or "sexually psychopathic", as long as the warehousing and the punishment are viewed as humane and just.
treatment could be better if it works and society has the resources for treatment, but often it doesn't have the resources and there is no guarantees that it will work. (and some "treatments" like chemical castration have been ruled inhumane.)
effectively, judge frank is forcing the state to find resources for risk assessment. it will be interesting how to assess the risk of sexual abuse. psychological tests, age, testosterone levels and other physical characteristics would not be able to assess risk well, and there will have to be some degree of subjective assessment.
"...critics of Minnesota’s civil commitment program say it is focused more on warehousing and punishing people than on treating them."
from society's view, it should be worthwhile to warehouse and to punish people when criminals are still deemed as "sexually dangerous" or "sexually psychopathic", as long as the warehousing and the punishment are viewed as humane and just.
treatment could be better if it works and society has the resources for treatment, but often it doesn't have the resources and there is no guarantees that it will work. (and some "treatments" like chemical castration have been ruled inhumane.)
effectively, judge frank is forcing the state to find resources for risk assessment. it will be interesting how to assess the risk of sexual abuse. psychological tests, age, testosterone levels and other physical characteristics would not be able to assess risk well, and there will have to be some degree of subjective assessment.
1
As I read the comments I understand the discomfort with incarceration for life. It's certainly not right. But what are the options? Sex offenders have among the highest recidivism rate of felons. And if you have children, would you be gracious and open minded enough to welcome them in your neighborhood? And would you do so gladly, without locking your doors? It's a hard question.
With 60 rapes or assaults on a record would you go first to have a welcome party? I honestly don't have a good answer for this.
On the other hand, let's talk about teenagers (18+) who engage in consensual sex with an underage person, say 15-17 or more likely "sexting" or texting/posting explicit photos. Many of these teens are arrested and adjudicated sex offenders and must register with the state as such. It never goes off their record.
I am in no way defending this teen idiocy but the consequences for these kids are life altering. Can that be right? Shouldn't there be a more thoughtful way of cataloging those particular offenses?
I have no definitive answer other than to point out that the eagerness to tag some kids with the "sex offender" scarlet letter is debatable. As is the notion that you or any one of us would welcome a proven rapist into our neighborhood. Yes, in that case I may be a NIMBY.
With 60 rapes or assaults on a record would you go first to have a welcome party? I honestly don't have a good answer for this.
On the other hand, let's talk about teenagers (18+) who engage in consensual sex with an underage person, say 15-17 or more likely "sexting" or texting/posting explicit photos. Many of these teens are arrested and adjudicated sex offenders and must register with the state as such. It never goes off their record.
I am in no way defending this teen idiocy but the consequences for these kids are life altering. Can that be right? Shouldn't there be a more thoughtful way of cataloging those particular offenses?
I have no definitive answer other than to point out that the eagerness to tag some kids with the "sex offender" scarlet letter is debatable. As is the notion that you or any one of us would welcome a proven rapist into our neighborhood. Yes, in that case I may be a NIMBY.
9
Far from being among the highest, sex offenders have the second lowest rates of recidivism of any of the classes of major felonies. According to the Bureau of Justice report in 2014, the only class of crime with a rate lower than the 60.1% for rape/sexual assault was the 51.2% rate for homicide. Robbery and assault were at 77%, drug offenses were at 77%, and burglary and larceny were at 81% and 84%, respectively. It should also be noted that these are the rates for felons arrested for any post release felony, not necessarily for the same type of felony as their first conviction.
8
WRONG! Sex offenders have a very low recidivism rate when taken as a whole. Furthermore, most people convicted of a sex offense have no prior record of sex offenses. Most people convicted of a sex offense will never commit another one. The ones who should be civilly committed are the repeat offenders because they are more likely to be unable to stop offending, but such sex offenders are actually a small minority. You need to get your facts straight.
3
Thank you for the specific stats. But 60% chance the rapist is likely to reoffend in some way, which common sense would indicate is most likely to follow previous patterns of behavior, is probably the main argument for these indefinite detention policies.
As mentioned before if you are a parent will you comfort yourself that the released rapist or child molester moving in next door is only 60% likely to reoffend?
Clearly the laws need revisiting and strong distinctions need to be made between the youth statutory rape situations and the repeated predatory offender. As a parent I fully support the indefinite separation of the worst offenders/threats from their next victims, free society.
As mentioned before if you are a parent will you comfort yourself that the released rapist or child molester moving in next door is only 60% likely to reoffend?
Clearly the laws need revisiting and strong distinctions need to be made between the youth statutory rape situations and the repeated predatory offender. As a parent I fully support the indefinite separation of the worst offenders/threats from their next victims, free society.
3
If these offenders are indeed that dangerous, by law certain sexual crimes should carry life without parole. A judge can then determine if the bar is met, rather than turning the decision over to people with a political incentive to keep offenders locked up forever. This is justice by the mob.
Are sex offense sentences too lenient? I honestly don't know. Is it a worse crime to molest a boy than beat him within an inch of his life? Or for that matter, run him over while crossing on walk, which may result in just a suspended license?
I feel for the victims, but society has to balance containing offenders with justice. As is, criminals walk free if reasonable doubt cannot be proven and we don't generally put someone behind bard preventively (Japanese internment during WWII notwithstanding). I see no reason why sexual crimes warrant a new principle.
Are sex offense sentences too lenient? I honestly don't know. Is it a worse crime to molest a boy than beat him within an inch of his life? Or for that matter, run him over while crossing on walk, which may result in just a suspended license?
I feel for the victims, but society has to balance containing offenders with justice. As is, criminals walk free if reasonable doubt cannot be proven and we don't generally put someone behind bard preventively (Japanese internment during WWII notwithstanding). I see no reason why sexual crimes warrant a new principle.
15
We have the same problem here in Germany. There are cases in which the perpetrators want to overcome their drive and have requested castration, but that is not permitted by our laws for fear that this option could be misused, as it was in the Third Reich. Yet, I think it would be a merciful option for those who recognize their condition and want to be reintegrated into society.
As to not trying someone twice for the same crime: I do wonder whether the writer would want a sexual offender who attacked one of his family members (Creator forbid that should ever happen!) to go free because he had already done time for the same crime. Laws are fine, principles are fine, but victims have the right to see the law done.
As to not trying someone twice for the same crime: I do wonder whether the writer would want a sexual offender who attacked one of his family members (Creator forbid that should ever happen!) to go free because he had already done time for the same crime. Laws are fine, principles are fine, but victims have the right to see the law done.
5
Yes, sex offense sentences are too lenient.
Ask any child rape victim. They'll let you know it's as bad as "beating him within an inch of his life" and worse.
Ask any child rape victim. They'll let you know it's as bad as "beating him within an inch of his life" and worse.
2
Sex offenders actually have a really low recidivism rate (~5%, vs 60% for other crimes, in the US). Admittedly, those 5% of crimes may tend to be for more serious crimes.
1
Randall S: the world is one grey area, at one time or another. If this issue was simple (black/white), it would have been easily decided years ago. It's precisely because no one can be sure if these wonderful human beings will molest/rape again that they're put into this preventive limbo.
2
Then why not put all felons into the same program - no one can be sure if a robber, a drug dealer, or a murderer will reoffend again, yet they are not subject to the same restrictions.
6
Robbery and murder are not in themselves diseases. 'Sexual psychopaths' are diseased people and cannot be rehabilitated. At least that's what most professionals have found over the last 100 years of trying. Castration may work, but that opens up a can of worms as it could easily be misused.
This country has had a shameful history of putting societies most undesirable elements in interment camps. This is no different. Either there is rule of law, or there isn't. If society wants the sex offender to be put away forever, then it should make that the law. It shouldn't be setting up these extra-legal, unconstitutional camps. Not only that, where does it end? Why not put all murderers, robbers, and thieves in camps of their own? Once the precedent is set, where does it end?
12
Why is this the only crime that is treated this way.
A released murderer can say he will kill someone the next day and is allowed total freedom.
A released murderer can say he will kill someone the next day and is allowed total freedom.
16
Wrong
Thanks to their deeply religious held values, most Americans are neurotic about sexual behaviour. As Hollywood films have shown since before the talkies, in mainstream America violence is OK; sex and nudity are not.
A violent offender can leave their victim in a wheelchair, blind, deaf and unable to speak. But that's OK - it's only good old violence, the American way, the way that won the West.
Hence, in the Land of the Free, a violent recidivist offender can be released after he or she has done their time. Sex offender? God no! When sex is involved, that's a different story.
A violent offender can leave their victim in a wheelchair, blind, deaf and unable to speak. But that's OK - it's only good old violence, the American way, the way that won the West.
Hence, in the Land of the Free, a violent recidivist offender can be released after he or she has done their time. Sex offender? God no! When sex is involved, that's a different story.
18
I think you've been watching too much TV. Yes, there is violence on TV, in video games, etc. But if a violent offender commits a crime, and they are caught, it's not good old violence. BTW, most Americans arbore violence. But freedom of speech allows TV, movies, etc. to be made and distributed. You don't have to buy them.
And we are not talking about sex here. Anyone that believes a violent rape (it is only the violent offenders that are held, not the 18 year old having sex with the 16 year old) is about sex is absolutely wrong. Violent rape is not about sex. And those deemed sexual psychopaths are not just 'sex offenders' but something much uglier, and not curable.
And we are not talking about sex here. Anyone that believes a violent rape (it is only the violent offenders that are held, not the 18 year old having sex with the 16 year old) is about sex is absolutely wrong. Violent rape is not about sex. And those deemed sexual psychopaths are not just 'sex offenders' but something much uglier, and not curable.
1
Sex offenders don't have civil rights? Now that's a win-win situation.
9
Sex offenders have no civil rights? Okay, let's assume that this would happen. The precedent has been set. Next they'll take away the civil rights of other criminals, then the mentally retarded, and then finally get around to take away your rights for doing a pretty good imitation of an idiot.
3
It seems to me the question here is can these offenders be successfully treated and reintroduced into society? It will take the system, society and the offender to find out. If the offender shows through treatment and improved behavior on probation that he or she can, then maybe a second chance is warranted. I'm of the belief that if a person truly wants to be healed and live productively, it is possible. What percent of offenders could actually accomplish this?
1
Most sex offenders respond well to treatment, and even without treatment most do not reoffend, although treatment reduces the recidivism rate significantly. But many who are civilly committed will never respond to treatment, especially the sociopaths and psychopaths. In fact, treatment of them would be counterproductive because they are very manipulative and learn quickly how to game the system.
2
In addition to violating some fundamental human rights, the U.S. policy regarding the treatment of sex offenders is both ineffective and extremely expensive. It focuses on imprisonment instead of psychic treatment. and when treatment, it tends toward cognitive behavioral treatments that aim merely for adjustment to social norms (primarily risk assessment to teach abstaining from the offense), instead of psychodynamic approaches that aim toward deeper self transformations. I am a professor of Anthropology at Princeton University, and recently completed an ethnographic study of the rehabilitation of child sex offenders in Germany (Cruel Attachments: The Ritual Rehab of Child Molesters in Germany, University of Chicago Press). Through therapy and limited incarceration, this policy is more efficacious in bringing about psychic change and more cost effective than punishment alone. The book argues that while some therapy is better than none, psychodyamic approaches can in most cases effect the more fundamental kind of psychic change demanded in the name of risk-prevention and security.
17
There is also the concept of conjugal visits in prison which is alive and well in Scandinavian prisons.
1
Either a person is a danger to society and belongs in prison, or else they are not, and don't. There isn't a grey area here.
7
Come on, of course there are gray areas. Just about any human being could represent a threat to his community given ample goads, or even ample opportunities. But the line that one crosses when he actually attacks another sexually is a hard one to argue is susceptible to psychoanalysis and treatment, when the actual future threat is considered, as well as the consequences of getting the consideration wrong.
In the end, responsible government is going to keep these people behind some form of wall for as long as they can, even if there's a moderate chance of future threat.
In the end, responsible government is going to keep these people behind some form of wall for as long as they can, even if there's a moderate chance of future threat.
5
Only incorrigibly violent men are to be segregated from society; it should be the job of trained psychiatrists to determine the capacity to re-offend. All others should be released. Sex-offender registries are useless jokes paraded around lie TSA guards to provide a false sense of security to those dull enough to believe in their efficacy. The registries violate citizens' 5th Amendment protections and should be abolished.
9
I disagree. If you think someone presents enough of a threat to society that they need to be segregated away from society, then we have a system for that: prison. Prison, while not desirable, has safeguards and limits. Civil commitment does not. Civil commitment is all the penalty of prison with none of the legal protection.
I also take issue with your supposition that jailing people indefinitely because they might, maybe, someday, eventually, possibly present a threat constitutes "responsible" governing.
I also take issue with your supposition that jailing people indefinitely because they might, maybe, someday, eventually, possibly present a threat constitutes "responsible" governing.
"Mr. Steiner, who wants to move in with his mother, 87, said he would never harm anyone else. 'When do you stop proving that to people?' he said."
Yes, he wants a chance to prove himself and that's his side of the story. But perhaps the answer to his question is that he CAN'T prove himself. He says "he would never" harm anyone else. Just how much weight does he think that statement carries? The fact that he hasn't harmed anyone while being watched like a hawk and segregated from the general population is not really proof of anything. The only way for him to prove himself would be if he were presented with an opportunity to a sexual offense (without knowing in advance that he would be caught) and for him to decline. Most people have been passing that test their entire lives without having trouble, but Mr. Steiner has proven himself to be a bad test-taker. While we're on the subject, our treatment of sex offenders completely contradicts the notion that our nation has a "rape culture." Once someone is actually PROVEN a rapist, no penalty is too harsh. There's even an ongoing debate about whether the death penalty should be applied (amongst those who feel the death penalty should exist at all, that is). For now, they keep their lives, but they are never truly "released." So to reiterate the answer Mr. Stein's question about how to regain society's trust. "You can't." Some things can't be proven. Not everything can be made right. Not everyone gets another chance.
Yes, he wants a chance to prove himself and that's his side of the story. But perhaps the answer to his question is that he CAN'T prove himself. He says "he would never" harm anyone else. Just how much weight does he think that statement carries? The fact that he hasn't harmed anyone while being watched like a hawk and segregated from the general population is not really proof of anything. The only way for him to prove himself would be if he were presented with an opportunity to a sexual offense (without knowing in advance that he would be caught) and for him to decline. Most people have been passing that test their entire lives without having trouble, but Mr. Steiner has proven himself to be a bad test-taker. While we're on the subject, our treatment of sex offenders completely contradicts the notion that our nation has a "rape culture." Once someone is actually PROVEN a rapist, no penalty is too harsh. There's even an ongoing debate about whether the death penalty should be applied (amongst those who feel the death penalty should exist at all, that is). For now, they keep their lives, but they are never truly "released." So to reiterate the answer Mr. Stein's question about how to regain society's trust. "You can't." Some things can't be proven. Not everything can be made right. Not everyone gets another chance.
19
But the death penalty for ANY crime less than murder would "cut both ways".
It WOULD deter some potential offenders, but it would also encourage some offenders to kill their victims. "The dead tell no tales". A man who realizes after committing a rape or child molestation that he is now in danger of execution may decide to kill his victim, to prevent her from giving his description or any other details. A man who has committed a crime like that is more likely NOT to kill the victim if he knows that he risks execution only if he kills her.
a
It WOULD deter some potential offenders, but it would also encourage some offenders to kill their victims. "The dead tell no tales". A man who realizes after committing a rape or child molestation that he is now in danger of execution may decide to kill his victim, to prevent her from giving his description or any other details. A man who has committed a crime like that is more likely NOT to kill the victim if he knows that he risks execution only if he kills her.
a
10
I agree, actually. I was not advocating for the death penalty to be applied to rape, just pointing out it's a topic of repeated discussion. I was just pointing out that it's about the only crime not necessary involving loss of life where an appreciable number of people would seriously consider executing the offender.
2
So, punishment without end. You say simply exterminate them. Wow, gad you're not a judge. Totalitarian state is what you prefer, I guess. Scary.
7
This is a political rather than a medical process. THIS is criminal. Any such commitment should be decided, approved and released by medical professional. States attorneys and judges are not qualified to determine the future of these men. I am surprised that the Federal system has not put a stop to this outrage.
5
Don’t labor under the illusion that there is a cadre of principled medical practitioners in the wings just waiting to step up and risk their careers. The findings of medical professionals make up a large part of the documentation that judges rely on to decide these cases. Just as no judge wants to be the one who frees a sex offender who goes on to commit another crime, no doctor wants to sign a piece of paper saying that any particular individual is suitable for release.
14
Human behavior is unpredictable. Even if someone is deemed medically sane, the medical profession is not able to predict future crimes. No medical professional would ever put themselves in the position to be liable for someone's crimes..
7
Where else but the New York Times can you read so many comments from people concerned more about the welfare of sadistic, violent predators who inflict rape and death on women and children than that of the victims?
It would be nice if one of them at least offered a solution to how to protect the next victims.
It would be nice if one of them at least offered a solution to how to protect the next victims.
28
Why are we concerned? Because if they can so easily deprive these people of their civil rights, it would not take much more to deprive YOU of your civil rights.
4
You tell me how to protect the next victims of other violent crime, for which it has been proven have higher recidivism rates. How about the guy who on his THIRD DUI ends up killing two people and still got released after 5 years? You think that isn't worse than some sex offender? You are dead wrong.
4
I don't read these comments as being "concerned more about the welfare" of the offenders. If you read carefully and think it through, most comments you're referring to are from people who actually are concerned about due process and civil liberties for all.
2
I'm sorry but rapists and pedophiles should stay locked up. Release the drug offenders (possession and/or use of marijuana as an example).
30
So you want to lock people up for having an attraction to children, or because they molested a child? A pedophile typically refers to the attraction, not molestation.
As a victim of sexual abuse as a child, by a person who was also victimizing his sisters, I don't think there is rehabilitation for sex offenders. Put them in prison for life, if it saves money. There should be some leeway with people charged with statutory rape, if there is evidence that the other party lied about age, but basically, once a sex offender, always a sex offender. I spent years trying to get my abuser prosecuted, because I worried that he would harm another child. The effects of child sexual abuse never really go away, it lives with you, it steals your childhood, it changes you forever. I have no sympathy. And every one of them should be chemically castrated, so they can never have sex again.
32
I am also a victim of childhood sexual abuse, but I vehemently disagree with your statement. Your abuser should be punished, of course, for what he did to you but forever? Most sex offenders can be successfully treated and will never reoffend. Given that he's a repeat offender the chances of that are lower, but it may be possible. You should also keep in mind that your abuser was almost certainly abused himself as a child. While most people who were sexually abused don't become pedophiles, most pedophiles were sexually abused as children. It was that realization that helped me to forgive my abuser.
2
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. First off, a sex offender is at a lower risk overall of reoffending than most other felons. Second off, chemical castration does not mean they can't have sex again. It means they won't have the desire to have sex. It is also reversible.
I'm sorry you endured this, and good for you trying to get him put away so he couldn't harm other children. You're absolutely right, these people cannot be reformed and they should be imprisoned for life in order to keep society's children safe. Best wishes to you.
Prisons are MONEYMAKERS .... so don't worry... just fill them up
2
So if not busy advocating for sex offenders then you would work for no wages, in a prison?
3
The single biggest issue is the one-size-fits-all routine. Due to media hysteria and numb-skulled politicians, sex offenders are all cast from the same lot. They are not all from the same lot. Some of them made mistakes, terrible errors of judgement over the internet and incarcerated by a system that punishes merely for the intent to do something, not something that actually happened. It punishes a teen for sex with another teen and depending on a few months, ruins a boy's life. Justice? Sex offenders have among the lowest recidivism rate yet are hounded, registered and tainted for life en masse. There is even a bill in congress calling for an International Megans Law, which may, thankfully, not be passed but is actually having Homeland Security send notices to other countries warning them of the arrival of a potential sex offender wanting to visit their country--even if that person is no longer required to register in America! Where does it end? When does this country allow people to do their time, pay their penance and get on with their lives? Even murderers don't face additional time or additional harassment when their incarceration ends.
16
Exactly, gene.
Currently "registered sex offenders" here in Texas run the gamut from a neighborhood teen or a small Middle/High School to those with an aggravated intent or true assault of an adult child relationship. The two are not equal other than one important point in Texas. Both the teen and the predator have the same designation: "sex offender" for as long as they miserably live.
Currently "registered sex offenders" here in Texas run the gamut from a neighborhood teen or a small Middle/High School to those with an aggravated intent or true assault of an adult child relationship. The two are not equal other than one important point in Texas. Both the teen and the predator have the same designation: "sex offender" for as long as they miserably live.
5
There is research data that a sexual predator who wants to overcome his problem may be able to do so with professional help. One of the problems are well-intended state laws that are counterproductive. In North Carolina if a person who has committed abusive acts on a child seeks help from a psychiatrist, psychologist or therapist, there is no privilege for communications made. The health care provider is statutorily required to report the offender, who then is prosecuted. The only privilege allowed is talking with an attorney, who must tell his client that he can't seek help without risking prosecution and prison.
It seems we're good at putting people into prisons, but not so good at providing care for people with serious mental health problems, inside or outside prison.
It seems we're good at putting people into prisons, but not so good at providing care for people with serious mental health problems, inside or outside prison.
25
There isn't a clear, well-accepted method to determine whether a serial sex offender will re-commit - completing a treatment program is no indicator by itself and most of these programs rely on review by staff psychiatrists/psychologists for a determination. Seeing a judge say "completed their prison sentences and who no longer pose a danger to the public" just shows how most (all?) judges are ignorant of the special nature of sex offences compared to other criminal behavior. Having worked with a victim's program that interviewed a good sample of convicted sex offenders it was striking how many, regardless of treatment status, were certain they would re-offend if released - and they are the best judges. In the absence of anything like a definitive, reliable methodology, I'd ask the judge and those responsible for release decisions for offenders that victimize children to ask themselves if they want that person living next door (if they have children) or next to someone they know and care about that has children. Making it more personal is likely better than the current method of guesswork and hope for the best. I hate to think that some people can't be rehabilitated, but given the consequences of a wrong decision (and knowing for a fact that the vast majority of victims never report) in cases of serial offenders I'd leave them where they can't hurt anyone else.
10
Pedophiles and sex offenders do not receive much jail time and finding out how little is shocking. Recently a person I know was arrested with over 300,000 images of child pornography -- the bad stuff, little kids and infants being sexually assaulted He received less than two months in jail. It would have been much less, maybe a few weeks; however, he couldn't stay off the internet and away from pornography for the time leading up to his sentencing. His two months included the original felonies and not meeting the conditions of his release.
He got out today...was the less than 2 months jail time a meaningful deterrent to not do it again? I think not, not even a little bit. Basically he learned he can get convicted of 4 felonies, break his conditions of release and merely get a slap on the wrist...much less time then he would have gotten if he sold drugs.
I know this article is about the lawfulness of people being civilly committed indefinitely but I am reacting to the horror of these crimes, the inability of many of the victims to protect themselves, and the light sentencing and almost non-existent treatment that these people receive once caught.
He got out today...was the less than 2 months jail time a meaningful deterrent to not do it again? I think not, not even a little bit. Basically he learned he can get convicted of 4 felonies, break his conditions of release and merely get a slap on the wrist...much less time then he would have gotten if he sold drugs.
I know this article is about the lawfulness of people being civilly committed indefinitely but I am reacting to the horror of these crimes, the inability of many of the victims to protect themselves, and the light sentencing and almost non-existent treatment that these people receive once caught.
10
So, the guy looked at pictures. Did he take the pictures? It would seem not. Did he actually molest anyone? It would seem not. But Ms DeZutter would apparently be happy to lock this guy up for thought crimes. That's barely even process, let alone due process. And it's just plain wrong.
3
I find this tale very difficult to believe.
Each photo possessed constitutes a potential felony crime. Even if the prosecutor aggregates them, it is a major felony crime, and is often prosecuted at the federal level, not state.
I know of one guy who had just 8 photos of child porn on his computer, sent to him by an acquaintance. He didn't forward them, he didn't take them. Those 8 photos got him a sentence in state prison of 5-10 years, with a mandatory minimum of 5 years (my state normally has a good time law in place which would have normally resulted in his release in 2.5 years).
A two month sentence is a misdemeanor, not a felony conviction (which requires a minimum of 1 year and 1 day).
In fact, most sex offenders get quite severe sentences, many far in excess than the crimes warranted. Those in this story are the worst of the worst, and deserve extremely long sentences. But most of those convicted of sex crimes are far less deserving of long sentences (New Orleans alone convicted 81 men of the sex crime of urinating against an alley wall in the French Quarter); Texas has convicted at least a dozen sex offenders under the age of 10!!
Incredibly, amongst all sex offenders, they have the lowest recidivism rate of any class of criminal except convicted murderers. FYI, alcoholics and drug users have the highest recidivism rate. Wouldn't you like to know if your new neighbor is likely to one day drunkenly run your child over?
Each photo possessed constitutes a potential felony crime. Even if the prosecutor aggregates them, it is a major felony crime, and is often prosecuted at the federal level, not state.
I know of one guy who had just 8 photos of child porn on his computer, sent to him by an acquaintance. He didn't forward them, he didn't take them. Those 8 photos got him a sentence in state prison of 5-10 years, with a mandatory minimum of 5 years (my state normally has a good time law in place which would have normally resulted in his release in 2.5 years).
A two month sentence is a misdemeanor, not a felony conviction (which requires a minimum of 1 year and 1 day).
In fact, most sex offenders get quite severe sentences, many far in excess than the crimes warranted. Those in this story are the worst of the worst, and deserve extremely long sentences. But most of those convicted of sex crimes are far less deserving of long sentences (New Orleans alone convicted 81 men of the sex crime of urinating against an alley wall in the French Quarter); Texas has convicted at least a dozen sex offenders under the age of 10!!
Incredibly, amongst all sex offenders, they have the lowest recidivism rate of any class of criminal except convicted murderers. FYI, alcoholics and drug users have the highest recidivism rate. Wouldn't you like to know if your new neighbor is likely to one day drunkenly run your child over?
2
While I agree he didn't molest someone physically, he is a contributor to the industry. He is a "john" if you will - and they do get arrested.
Civil commitment or indefinite detention is a dangerous idea that can be applied in a broader way, as many "crazy" (not crazy) wives learned in the 1950's when they protested their husbands too much.
Constitutionally, if a judge/jury sentences someone, how can another government officer hold the person after the sentence is served? Wouldn't this authority run counter to the constitutional authority of the court or the jury? This is another example of executive power interfering with the power of the judiciary.
If the state wants to keep these people in prison for life, then they should do the hard work of changing the law instead of the lazy work of violating the constitution.
Constitutionally, if a judge/jury sentences someone, how can another government officer hold the person after the sentence is served? Wouldn't this authority run counter to the constitutional authority of the court or the jury? This is another example of executive power interfering with the power of the judiciary.
If the state wants to keep these people in prison for life, then they should do the hard work of changing the law instead of the lazy work of violating the constitution.
6
I know a guy who tricked a prostitute into sex for exchange of drugs- After the sex act was completed and he didnt give her drugs she fought with him-and she called the police-the sex was consensual so police charged him unlawfull imprisonment/kidnapping.
He served 25 yrs timed out refused parole.
UIpon release state tried to hold him but could not,he went to california-big mistake.
1 yr later a local teenage girl waiting for the school bus in front of his burb house asked him for a cigerette-she had entered the threshold of his garage where he was smoking with 3 small dogs-his sisters and mothers pets.
He replied-sure wait a minute and touched the garage door button to close it so that the little dogs wouldnt run outside when he went to the kitchen table JUST INSIDE the door-teen girl panicked RAN AWAY under the closing door jumped on the school bus upon arriving at the school reported incident to school rescource officer.
local PD promptly went to the address arrested him charged him with ATTEMPTED KIDNAPPING.
they found the other states records conviction timed out no parole release.
no trial held in california under the states danger to the general public law
the man arrested had witnesses his sister and mother were BOTH home.
he didnt even have to STEP outside of his own garage when trouble came calling never touched the girl just replied sure i get you a cig. the bull hit the fan.
He served 25 yrs timed out refused parole.
UIpon release state tried to hold him but could not,he went to california-big mistake.
1 yr later a local teenage girl waiting for the school bus in front of his burb house asked him for a cigerette-she had entered the threshold of his garage where he was smoking with 3 small dogs-his sisters and mothers pets.
He replied-sure wait a minute and touched the garage door button to close it so that the little dogs wouldnt run outside when he went to the kitchen table JUST INSIDE the door-teen girl panicked RAN AWAY under the closing door jumped on the school bus upon arriving at the school reported incident to school rescource officer.
local PD promptly went to the address arrested him charged him with ATTEMPTED KIDNAPPING.
they found the other states records conviction timed out no parole release.
no trial held in california under the states danger to the general public law
the man arrested had witnesses his sister and mother were BOTH home.
he didnt even have to STEP outside of his own garage when trouble came calling never touched the girl just replied sure i get you a cig. the bull hit the fan.
1
I know a guy who was a decorated National Guard combat veteran. At age 22, just back from Iraq, his friends took him out to a club. Everyone entering was carded; everyone purchasing a drink was carded.
He met a young lady there. They danced, joked, socialized, and bought each other drinks, so he saw her carded multiple times.
She went home with him and spent the night. In the morning she left, giving him her phone number, asking he call her sometime to perhaps go out again.
Two days later, he was arrested and charged with sexual assault of a child under age 16! He, of course, denied it...until the prosecutor passed discovery data to his lawyer, who explained the young lady he'd met at the club was in possession of a fake ID, and was really only 15!
Under our law, if any adult has sex with a child, in this case anyone under 16, consent or willing participation of the minor and knowledge of the actual age of the minor by the senior is totally irrelevant! It is rape of a child, period!
He was offered a plea deal to avoid a trial of the felony crime of attempted sexual assault of a child. The original charge (which is what he'd face in a jury trial) carried a 20 to life sentence; the plea sentence could be anything from probation to 50 years, up to the judge.
He took the deal, was evaluated 3 times by the probation department, who concluded he was no threat and recommended probation. Instead, he got 2-5 years in prison, and served 1 in prison, 1 on parole, 15 yrs on the SOR.
He met a young lady there. They danced, joked, socialized, and bought each other drinks, so he saw her carded multiple times.
She went home with him and spent the night. In the morning she left, giving him her phone number, asking he call her sometime to perhaps go out again.
Two days later, he was arrested and charged with sexual assault of a child under age 16! He, of course, denied it...until the prosecutor passed discovery data to his lawyer, who explained the young lady he'd met at the club was in possession of a fake ID, and was really only 15!
Under our law, if any adult has sex with a child, in this case anyone under 16, consent or willing participation of the minor and knowledge of the actual age of the minor by the senior is totally irrelevant! It is rape of a child, period!
He was offered a plea deal to avoid a trial of the felony crime of attempted sexual assault of a child. The original charge (which is what he'd face in a jury trial) carried a 20 to life sentence; the plea sentence could be anything from probation to 50 years, up to the judge.
He took the deal, was evaluated 3 times by the probation department, who concluded he was no threat and recommended probation. Instead, he got 2-5 years in prison, and served 1 in prison, 1 on parole, 15 yrs on the SOR.
3
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted
2
How about the cruel and unusual things that these people did to their victims?
9
Then change the law so that their cruel and unusual crimes are punished appropriately.
But once a criminal completes his/her sentence, they are entitled to their freedom unless and until they commit another crime.
Once upon a time, it was generally believed in this nation that our Constitution guaranteed that we would only be imprisoned for those criminal acts we actually commit, not for those that we might one day maybe commit.
But once a criminal completes his/her sentence, they are entitled to their freedom unless and until they commit another crime.
Once upon a time, it was generally believed in this nation that our Constitution guaranteed that we would only be imprisoned for those criminal acts we actually commit, not for those that we might one day maybe commit.
2
If the sentencing and rehabilitation of all the various types of sexual offenders were an easy problem to solve without economic or political consequences, solutions other than civil commitment would be in place. Nearly all proposed therapies are too expensive and without evidence of success. Once released, sexual offenders are limited in where they are permitted to live. The reality is that it is easier politically and cheaper for states to identify sexual offenders and warehouse them than to use unproven therapies leading to release to communities unwilling to allow them housing.
The reasons for the number of sexual offenders held in civil commitment in Minnesota are complicated, Many of us share Gov. Dayton's concerns that no one wants to implement a potentially expensive treatment policy (unlikely to pass a currently Republican House) which puts Minnesota (or neighboring states) families at risk.
It is easy to criticize a civil commitment program for sexual offenders--and very easy to find people willing to be quoted criticizing such programs, especially sexual offenders. It is much, much harder finding proposed solutions within budget constraints and people willing to support such solutions politically.
The reasons for the number of sexual offenders held in civil commitment in Minnesota are complicated, Many of us share Gov. Dayton's concerns that no one wants to implement a potentially expensive treatment policy (unlikely to pass a currently Republican House) which puts Minnesota (or neighboring states) families at risk.
It is easy to criticize a civil commitment program for sexual offenders--and very easy to find people willing to be quoted criticizing such programs, especially sexual offenders. It is much, much harder finding proposed solutions within budget constraints and people willing to support such solutions politically.
17
"Expensive treatment policy"? That's not a potentiality. It's the state of affairs that exists in Moose Lake today. Minnesota taxpayers are paying about $135,000 per ‘patient’ per year to maintain the pretense that these people are being treated and not just serving extra-Constitutional prison sentences.
1
I wish I could give this post six "Likes." I, too, am survivor of sexual abuse. I have see daily proof that sex offenders can change. However, some sex offenders will not change. Currently, sex addicts are the addicts least likely to experience long-term recovery. As someone whose childhood was obliterated by sexual abuse, I hope that 20-50 years from now, society will understand sex offenders as treatable addicts, the same way we have come to understand alcoholics as such.
Today, the awareness of and treatment for sex addiction is about where the awareness of and treatment for alcoholism was, 20 or so years after Bill W. and Dr. Bob wrote The Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous (A.A.).
The manuscript that became AA's Big Book was first distributed in 1938, not to be published for wide distribution until 1943. At the time, alcoholism wasn’t even alcoholism. It was a whispered-about depravity, a moral failing and societal scourge blasted by preachers and criminalized by politicians. Lushes needed more willpower. TIt took 50, even 60 years to understand alcoholism as an incurable addiction that somehow, magically, A.A. could treat, based on the alcoholic's commitment.
The seminal book for sexual recovery, Pat Carnes' Out of the Shadows, published only as recently as 1994. There is every reason to expect that with time, sex offenders can stem the tide of recidivism. As they become willing.
Today, the awareness of and treatment for sex addiction is about where the awareness of and treatment for alcoholism was, 20 or so years after Bill W. and Dr. Bob wrote The Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous (A.A.).
The manuscript that became AA's Big Book was first distributed in 1938, not to be published for wide distribution until 1943. At the time, alcoholism wasn’t even alcoholism. It was a whispered-about depravity, a moral failing and societal scourge blasted by preachers and criminalized by politicians. Lushes needed more willpower. TIt took 50, even 60 years to understand alcoholism as an incurable addiction that somehow, magically, A.A. could treat, based on the alcoholic's commitment.
The seminal book for sexual recovery, Pat Carnes' Out of the Shadows, published only as recently as 1994. There is every reason to expect that with time, sex offenders can stem the tide of recidivism. As they become willing.
1
So here is a solution. Abolish the sex offender registry for tier one offenders- for MN, that is several thousand. Use the resources to create resources for teenagers, and make it known that if anyone is struggling with any issue related to sex- abuse, thoughts, urges, attractions, etc- that there is help available. Refer them to treatment programs. By the time they are 18, every single child will know that if they are struggling with sexuality in any way, they can get help.
1
i wish I was surprised to see so many Americans this cheerfully willing to give the Bill of Rights the old heave-ho.
4
Serial rapists and child molesters should be given life in prison without parole. They don't deserve treatment, the are simply evil mutants who should be keep locked up till they die.
15
Whatever happened to voluntary chemical castration? I'm sure some of these offenders who have served their term yet are stuck in these commitment programs would opt for that, just to be free. If your sexual drive is dead, wouldn't that render you incapable and without the desire to rape or abuse? Just asking.
11
We are very concerned about the rights of rapists and murderers.
For those that physically harm others- I have no concern.
We let these men out and, without a doubt, people will be raped and murdered.
I am tired of all the concern over these folks. My god- it took three years to prosecute Holmes- after he admitted his guilt.
Our justice system is broken.
For those that physically harm others- I have no concern.
We let these men out and, without a doubt, people will be raped and murdered.
I am tired of all the concern over these folks. My god- it took three years to prosecute Holmes- after he admitted his guilt.
Our justice system is broken.
10
Lock them up, and throw away the key. The worst of the perpetrators cannot control their urges, and are at high percentage of repeat offensives within the first 12 months of being released. More states should have what MN has in place.
10
Please cite your sources for these facts.
i bet that many posting here demanding that these rapists stay in prison also feel that Ms. Stubblefield should be set free. I just read the comment from "EM" from Tucson, Az, my deepest sympathies and i hope you can recover from the vicious attack that happened to you. The mentally and physically impaired man, "DJ" is very much like a very young child being raped by an adult caregiver, yet so many commentators showed unwavering support for the convicted rapist, giving all sorts of excuses, for she too isn't that type of typical rapist, the one that only exists in dark back alleys. I hope "EM's" story can penetrate these thick skulls and see what rapists really are- cruel, evil, sadistic individuals with so much hate in them.
3
Ms. Stubblefield is a sexual predator and I can't imagine the minds of the people that support her.
You are right that molesting a mentally impaired person is just like molesting a child.
I hope she is prosecuted to the full extent of the law and, if convicted, receives a stiff prison sentence.
You are right that molesting a mentally impaired person is just like molesting a child.
I hope she is prosecuted to the full extent of the law and, if convicted, receives a stiff prison sentence.
2
This is an emotional issue. It is difficult but not impossible to feel sympathy for the perpetrators locked up indefinitely with little to no hope of ever getting out. If I were a victim of one of the men locked up I am not sure I would ever feel safe knowing that they were - at some point- going to be released. Because there are so many perpetrators out there and the prisons are already overflowing I am not sure moving them from one institution to another is going to do a lot of good. A violent sexual predator isn't going to get any help in prison - no rehabilitation. If rehabilitation actually works - which if it did - one would think more people would be being released. It would be nice if the victim got to decide the sentence for their perpetrator. That will never happen of course. It is a complex issue with no easy answers.
2
These laws are a product of an era, I hope now ended, when "lock them up and throw away the key" was a winning legislative position. Little evidence was needed; the debate (to the extent there was one) focused on emotional stories about little girls with names like Megan.
Times have changed, but the laws have not. I disagree, and profoundly, with the times on many things. But we agree on this one. Where are the legion of liberal judges to put an end to this injustice?
Times have changed, but the laws have not. I disagree, and profoundly, with the times on many things. But we agree on this one. Where are the legion of liberal judges to put an end to this injustice?
4
Putting a career criminal into a drug treatment program.
You know, the guy that shot and killed the NY City Police Officer a few days ago.
Of course the judge isn't accepting any responsibility for her stupid decision.
You know, the guy that shot and killed the NY City Police Officer a few days ago.
Of course the judge isn't accepting any responsibility for her stupid decision.
2
I was a victim of sexual abuse. Working through my sexual abuse at 19 (13 years after it had occurred) was the worst year of my life. Still, I'm disturbed by our lack of understanding of rape and sexual abuse. We like to imagine a dark alley and a violent stranger when in fact most victims know their abuse- I did. We like to vilify perpetrators to the extent that we believe that they can never change. I don't agree.
Unfortunately, many children like me never say anything to their parents or authorities about sexual abuse. We need to stop shielding our children from the reality of sexual abuse for fear of hurting them. What's hurting children is not having the words to describe their abuse. What's hurting children is hearing about rape years after they've already been hurt. What's hurting children is blaming girls for their rape when they dress, talk, or act a certain way. What's hurting our children is pretending we've already got all the bad guys locked up. 98% of rapist never spend a day in jail. It's time we acknowledge that we are partially to blame. Start talking about consent. Teach your kids to treat others with respect. Be careful about media that makes light of sexual violence and perpetuates victim blaming.
I haven't forgiven my abuser- I don't think I'm required to, but I know that people can change. We need to give them tools and the chance to do so. No one deserves a life time of unemployment or a prison outside of prison.
Unfortunately, many children like me never say anything to their parents or authorities about sexual abuse. We need to stop shielding our children from the reality of sexual abuse for fear of hurting them. What's hurting children is not having the words to describe their abuse. What's hurting children is hearing about rape years after they've already been hurt. What's hurting children is blaming girls for their rape when they dress, talk, or act a certain way. What's hurting our children is pretending we've already got all the bad guys locked up. 98% of rapist never spend a day in jail. It's time we acknowledge that we are partially to blame. Start talking about consent. Teach your kids to treat others with respect. Be careful about media that makes light of sexual violence and perpetuates victim blaming.
I haven't forgiven my abuser- I don't think I'm required to, but I know that people can change. We need to give them tools and the chance to do so. No one deserves a life time of unemployment or a prison outside of prison.
51
Imagine what could be accomplished if the treatment and therapy that is mandated for those who do get caught were available to them before they acted.
Infinite Detention, only in a very backward totalitarian state, like the US, in particular. This place and what we do makes my skin crawl.
6
And people who have compassion for the perpetrator instead of the victim make my skin crawl.
2
The ONLY instances that I believe in any kind of leniency and/or re-evaluation of a conviction for a sex offense is in instances where a person was charged with a sex offense for urinating in a public area or in *some* statutory rapes charges (like an obviously non-violent encounter where one the parties may have lied about their age saying they were older than they actually were, unbeknownst to the other party).
I think the only scrutiny that would be productive is the process of HOW sex offenders are classified - particularly for the examples I mentioned above - but when a person engages in a pattern of repeated behavior of victimizing others through sexual crimes, they do pose a constant threat to those around them.
I think the only scrutiny that would be productive is the process of HOW sex offenders are classified - particularly for the examples I mentioned above - but when a person engages in a pattern of repeated behavior of victimizing others through sexual crimes, they do pose a constant threat to those around them.
12
It is called a "sentence" with a provision that they satisfactorily complete the mandated "rehabilitation." Even the psychiatrists agree that there is no known therapy that will effectively rehabilitate a sex offender. The psychiatrists gave up on rehabilitating gay people and are recommending that we stop persecuting pedophiles. If there is no "cure" and we want our children to be safe what choice do we have but to keep then segregated from society. If they "can't control their behavior because they born with these predispositions," similar to the gay reasoning then we should just turn them out to continue behaving as the predators they are fated to be.
2
I am a huge advocate of prison and criminal justice reform, but I struggle when considering what we as a society should do with sex offenders. I think that it is unacceptable that sex offenders remain locked up beyond their sentences, but simply cannot advocate that they be let loose unsupervised on society.
Many rapists have raped multiple women before they are caught and sentences for raping one or two women. We know from this from the testing of the backlogged rape kits. Pedophilia is a mentally illness with no consensus about how to treat and cure these people.
The only solution I find acceptable is that there should court mandated treatment and monitoring of sex offenders on their release. It is not enough to put ankle monitor on them and send them on their merry way. We have to consider 24 hour surveillance. This would mean using tax dollars to hire more case workers, probation officers, psychologists, etc.
Many rapists have raped multiple women before they are caught and sentences for raping one or two women. We know from this from the testing of the backlogged rape kits. Pedophilia is a mentally illness with no consensus about how to treat and cure these people.
The only solution I find acceptable is that there should court mandated treatment and monitoring of sex offenders on their release. It is not enough to put ankle monitor on them and send them on their merry way. We have to consider 24 hour surveillance. This would mean using tax dollars to hire more case workers, probation officers, psychologists, etc.
3
There are logic problems here. Why should sex offenses be treated differently than other violent offenses? When someone murders another, or commits manslaughter, it is possible for that person to get a sentence that they will complete and then be eligible for release. If that murdered has done their statutory time, they should be free to live unsupervised. Why is a sex offender different?
Pedophilia, like any paraphilia or fetish, is probably about as curable as homosexuality. But does that mean that every individual with pedophilia needs to be castrated, incarcerated or executed? The murdering child rapist is likely very different from the man who masturbates to child porn. We need to understand those differences in order to assess risk and to help those who are not dangerous to live productive lives in society. It seems that once sex is mentioned, all rational thought goes out the window. So, let's talk about something that feels a lot safer: violence. There are certainly dangerous and violent individuals but for every one who actually commits an act of violence, there are scores of fetishists who will never offend. You know who they/you are. Those who watch violent films. Those who are fans of professional wrestling. Those who make torture porn commercially successful enough to merit multiple sequels and be recognized as a genre. Those who accumulate multiple military grade weapons designed specifically to kill people quickly and efficiently. Most of you are never going to actually hurt anyone. I hypothesize that it is likely the same with the vast majority of pedophiles. But, fondle your arsenal while watching Saw 14 and you're fine. However, possession of forbidden imagery, even if computer generated or drawn, will send you away forever.
6
I am against permanent incarceration, but I totally disagree with you that watching child porn is "not dangerous." It's made because there's a demand, and what do you think happens to the children used to make it?
9
Those are separate issues. I believe I saw a video of Gaddafi's death. I don't believe that it made me a killer nor at greater risk of committing murder. Of course, creating porn using children is a horrible crime with catastrophic consequences for the victims. But what if someone watched a CGI movie? One of my points is really that pretending that impulses don't exist, whether they are violent or sexual, considered aberrant or not, does not make them go away. But perhaps there are ways, I don't claim to know what they are when it comes to pedophilia, in which aberrant and even dangerous fantasies and urges can be, for lack of a better term, indulged without harm to others.
Did the man watching child porn not realise that a child was kidnapped or trafficked and imprisoned before being raped on camera? Does that man not realise the child can't c sent? As a society we need to stop making excuses for those who rape or support the rape of children under any circumstance.
1
In the 60s we compassionately let everyone out of mental institutions and now they are sleeping under bridges. Let's not compassionately let sex offenders out to roam the streets without a plan because their sexual orientation involves tiny people who can't consent to it and will be permanently traumatized by it.
30
In most US jurisdictions, a 17-year-old who is convicted of having sex with his/her fifteen-year-old boyfriend/girlfriend will need to register as a sex offender.
There seem to be dramatically varying opinions on recidivism rates for sex offenders. Popular belief seems to be that child molesters are rarely 'cured' and remain dangerous in spite of treatment. Some commenters here state that there is low recidivism. What are the real stats for both pedophilies and those that violate adults?
7
The recidivism rate for sex offenders who commit child molestation or rape is about 5% within a 5 year period of release and 15% child molestation and 24% rape over a 15 year period which is lower than any other convicted felony with the exception of murder. The recidivism of everyone else you find on the sex offender registry which make up the vast majority of sex offenders is around 1% (statutory rape, peeing on the street corner, indecency with a minor fall into this area.) There are statistics on the internet that are between 27-40% which is much higher but still considered low compared to other crimes. However, these studies include failure to properly report annual sex offender registry or moving without prior notification which automatically puts the offender back in prison regardless of any reasoning being medical or eviction due to land lord finding out that the tenant is a sex offender. That being said 15% re-offend and 46% return to prison for sex offender registry violations. I hope that this somewhat answers your question.
I don't see why these Sates didn't just increase the penalties for these crimes. Often rapists only get 7-10 years, for a vicious attack or multiple attacks here in Oregon, double the minimum or have a mandatory minimum of at least 20, 25 years, no parole , no early release that Corrections Departments often spring on the community. Take that authority away from local sheriffs and departments in charge of prisons. Budget cuts are another problem, many states give counties the power to early release prisoners if they are too lazy and cheap to fund their prison systems properly. It's been proven that sex offenders have very high rate recidivism . We need treatment programs in jails, but not this dumb civil commitments, it shows that political and community leaders can't get things under control, that they can't seem to be able to increase the penalties, and just sit back and watch rapists get a literal slap on the hand as a sentence. There is no free lunch, if you don't want these guys out and about raping women and children, then you need to pay for the incarceration, something many countries here in Oregon are too cheap to do.
6
The issue here concerns the fundamentally unfair administration of Minnesota's commitment program. Minnesota incarcerates repeat sexual offenders for long periods of time. Some of these individuals have forcibly engaged in sex with minors multiple times. When their sentences are complete, they are subject to civil commitment, just as are the mentally ill who are deemed to be a danger to themselves or others. The commitment procedure is civil not criminal -- so that commitment is allowed based on clear and convincing evidence. Once committed, the government must treat and seek to rehabilitate former prisoners so that some, at least, can be released into the community. Minnesota isn't doing that as there are no signs of progress. The judge did not rule that anyone in particular had to be released. Instead, she ruled that the state is not exercising due diligence and is using civil commitment as a dumping ground for offenders. The State need not release anyone at all. But it must make an effort in this regard, and that is not happening.
15
Raise your hand if you want to live with a convicted sex offender. Well, that is my current living situation. My partner's cousin after doing some 25 years in prison finally got released due to the persistence of a family member. All along my boyfriend and I knew that it would be best for EVERYONE that this convicted sex offender remain in prison. Now he is OUR problem and potentially he is society's problem. This person requires very close supervision, but he is receiving very little aside from what we are providing ourselves.
Now I get to be a prisoner in my own home. Each and every day I wake up with a pit in my stomach knowing that I living with a sex offender. My address and apartment are now part of the sex offender registry. These people do NOT reform themselves, and the parolee I am dealing with learned absolutely ZERO in the many years he was incarcerated. No self reflection or repentance ever happened and not even for a minute. In his mind, HE is the victim!
Now I get to be a prisoner in my own home. Each and every day I wake up with a pit in my stomach knowing that I living with a sex offender. My address and apartment are now part of the sex offender registry. These people do NOT reform themselves, and the parolee I am dealing with learned absolutely ZERO in the many years he was incarcerated. No self reflection or repentance ever happened and not even for a minute. In his mind, HE is the victim!
16
why are you stuck with him? Why didn't that "Persistent family member" take him in? It was that family members badgering that got this guy released, but then had him dumped on you. Something doesn't sound right here.
5
Why isn't the family member who persisted in getting this person out of prison providing a home for him?
Why is it your partner's responsibility?
I hope you are taking precautions to insure your safety.
Why is it your partner's responsibility?
I hope you are taking precautions to insure your safety.
3
I'm sorry you're stuck in that position, suzinne. I do hope you can find a way to get the persistent family member to take the sex offender off your hands.
.
Frankly I think the lawyers, psychiatrists, and activists who want to end Civil Committment should step up to the plate, put their money where their mouths are, and take sex offenders into their own homes. Anything else strikes me as more than a little hypocritical. Like that persistent family member.
.
Frankly I think the lawyers, psychiatrists, and activists who want to end Civil Committment should step up to the plate, put their money where their mouths are, and take sex offenders into their own homes. Anything else strikes me as more than a little hypocritical. Like that persistent family member.
4
So it's okay to let out a dangerous non-sex offender who might murder you or your kids, but not a sex offender who might murder you or your kids? Doesn't make much sense to me - if someone is physically dangerous to others, they should be treated similarly regardless of the crime.
In addition, not all "sex offenders" are the same or necessarily violent, but have been labeled such by the legal system and overzealous prosecutors (e.g., at one extreme are the 18 year old male was charged with and imprisoned for statutory rape and labelled a sex offender and pedophile for life for having consensual sex with his 17 year old long time (before he was 18) girlfriend - he was black and she was white, in GA; or the college male lying in bed nude with nude girlfriend, both drunk coming in and out of consciousness, charged and convicted of rape - in neither case are these 2 men particularly scary). Are these types of people also in this setup or are all of the 700 truly scary repeat offender people?
In addition, not all "sex offenders" are the same or necessarily violent, but have been labeled such by the legal system and overzealous prosecutors (e.g., at one extreme are the 18 year old male was charged with and imprisoned for statutory rape and labelled a sex offender and pedophile for life for having consensual sex with his 17 year old long time (before he was 18) girlfriend - he was black and she was white, in GA; or the college male lying in bed nude with nude girlfriend, both drunk coming in and out of consciousness, charged and convicted of rape - in neither case are these 2 men particularly scary). Are these types of people also in this setup or are all of the 700 truly scary repeat offender people?
15
And we still publish on websites where people convicted of public urination in states like Oklahoma live. This is a national shame and although I find this website much too liberal, and in many ways destructive, I fully concur with the drive to reform these programs.
In my view the best reform is to destroy these programs. They are horrible violations of due process and double jeopardy.
In my view the best reform is to destroy these programs. They are horrible violations of due process and double jeopardy.
2
Wouldn't it be nice if there was more concern and compassion for the victims and less for the perpetrators?
It sounds like some people commenting on this article would have freed Ted Bundy.
It sounds like some people commenting on this article would have freed Ted Bundy.
2
You forfeit your right to any pity or shortened sentence when you commit this sort of a despicable crime. Put them in jail and throw the key away. And remember the victims and potential victims before you think of the perpetrator.
11
Yeah, whatever. Show me in the constitution where you forfeit the Bill of Rights or your humanity.
It is said that the First Amendment is not there to protect parades on the Fourth of July. Just so. The Bill of Rights is not there for parking tickets, but to protect such fellow human beings as featured in this article.
It is said that the First Amendment is not there to protect parades on the Fourth of July. Just so. The Bill of Rights is not there for parking tickets, but to protect such fellow human beings as featured in this article.
3
@paul, if you wish, but learn to live without cops, sports coaches, women, men, teenagers. The probem is they are all lumped into one division, even though they represent varying degrees of offending. Raping a child is uncontested by anyone as very bad stuff that should get one a life sentence. But there are those serving time who had an affair with a minor, others exposed themselves, others are convicted by juries sympathetic to females even though there was some consent. Also, what's a minor? Some states 16, others 18. A seventeen year old boy who has sex with a15 year old could get him labeled as sex offender, consent or not. Ruin his life over that? This seems cruel, flawed and heavily stacked against men by the way. We should figure a better way, yet the political forces of feminism and the fear of men to seem sympathetic to rapists or sex offenders, causes us all to blanket terms all of them. We all know and agree upon who a predator is. What about al the others?
3
I don't understand how we can keep people locked up if they have served their time in jail. Either give longer sentences or drop it. Same with the 'sex offender registries'. If someone is a threat to society, he should be in jail. It makes no sense to let him out, but put him on some sort of watch list. Either he's paid his debt to society or he hasn't. All these idiotic policies were enacted in reaction to one particular case. That is a ridiculous way to make public policy.
13
We do and have done, and the courts upheld them. Did you not know? The information is at your fingertips. None of this is secret. In some states, politicians still boast of it. Some of these states (as mentioned in the article) have legislatures with Democratic majorities.
2
Of course they are never let out. Sex offenders are so demonized that we can't even really study them. So what clinician is going to bless a release when she will surely be crucified if he were to reoffend? Ain't gonna happen. Clinicians can't attest to safety when there is no reliable way to predict it. So, the only way to make it fair is to let people serve their time and go home, like for every other crime. We really need to ask ourselves why we are so terrified of sex crime. To me, getting raped is still better than getting killed.
11
Student - have you ever been raped?
Rape or incest is often a life sentence for the victim. One's sense of safety and attitude toward sex are usually forever changed.
I believed any sex offender over the age of 21 should automatically receive a life sentence with the possibility of parole.
Rape or incest is often a life sentence for the victim. One's sense of safety and attitude toward sex are usually forever changed.
I believed any sex offender over the age of 21 should automatically receive a life sentence with the possibility of parole.
9
It helps me to know that you are a "student", you have much more to learn. There are plenty of sex offenders in jail who you could study, go into forensic psychology if your interested but please don't make statements about which type of victimization you prefer, its offensive to many you have been raped and those families who have lost loved one to murder of both.
6
I have, fortunately, never been raped or killed. I do have a child and would prefer to be raped and survive than to be killed. It would undoubtedly be horrible and life altering, but it would not forever rob me of joy or hope. It would not rob my child of a parent.
1
If we had if we gave violent rapists and child molesters appropriate sentences, we wouldn't need Civil Committment. The appropriate sentence for forcible rape, sexual assault of a child by an adult, and maybe the third-offense for a lesser sex crime, is life in prison with the possibility of parole if they meet strict treatment requirements. This way if they don't meet the treatment requirements, they're simply not let out of prison.
.
On a different note, we need to understand the urban quality of life issues that relate to the release of violent sex offenders. All too often, they congregate in poor neighborhoods. It's not good for them, but it's worse for the neighbors in these places. Not only are these neighbors struggling to get by, now they can't feel safe letting their kids play outside in their own neighborhoods. I know it's not politically correct to bring it up, but it's a real problem.
.
On a different note, we need to understand the urban quality of life issues that relate to the release of violent sex offenders. All too often, they congregate in poor neighborhoods. It's not good for them, but it's worse for the neighbors in these places. Not only are these neighbors struggling to get by, now they can't feel safe letting their kids play outside in their own neighborhoods. I know it's not politically correct to bring it up, but it's a real problem.
15
Many politicians made careers over increasing sentences and punishment for such people are not featured here. You proffer no evidence that the maximum sentences were so low that judges roared with frustration as people walked away laughing due to the trivial nature of maximum sentences. And indeed it was never so. The sentencing laws are harsh and still tag many with the mark of Cain, to be found on sex offender websites still effectively mandated by federal law, and also in every state.
Where is Obama?
Where is Obama?
1
Amazing to me that a system so clearly unconstitutional has lasted this long, and indeed still exists. An individual who serves the sentence imposed after conviction should be released, period. That's the justice system; holding them in perpetuity in some thinly veiled confinement system called "treatment" doesn't pass the smell test.
I'm perfectly willing to believe that some, maybe many sex offenders are predisposed to attacking women or children and are permanent threats to society. If so, prove it in court and give that person a life sentence. But confinement after serving one's sentence is fundamentally contrary to our system and views of justice.
I'm perfectly willing to believe that some, maybe many sex offenders are predisposed to attacking women or children and are permanent threats to society. If so, prove it in court and give that person a life sentence. But confinement after serving one's sentence is fundamentally contrary to our system and views of justice.
20
It was held constitutional by the US Supreme Court in 1998 and 1999.
3
They let murderers go free after they served their time. They let drug dealers and other violent offenders go free after they served their time. What is it about the word 'sex' that makes people lose all rational thought? Put 'sex' in the offense and you're locked up for life. But you can go out and kill and deal drugs again until the next time they catch you. But 'sex', in whatever form, god forbid!
We are a strange country.
We are a strange country.
25
Because they are sexual predators - that's how they're wired, and that's how they operate - by viewing others as 'their' prey.
I don't see the comparisons to other types of convicted offenders you mentioned - drug dealing and sex offenses are two very different types of criminal activity.
I don't see the comparisons to other types of convicted offenders you mentioned - drug dealing and sex offenses are two very different types of criminal activity.
9
Let's see if you still feel that way after you're raped up by a sex offender. It's not just about sex.
13
I agree, but I think every young man should study this article and make sure he is never accused of any crime of a sexual nature. Your life is over.
Particularly egregious is that sleeping with a girlfriend is legal in certain states where the age of consent is 16 years. In an adjoining state, however, it could put you behind bars, and on the sex offender registry for life.
Particularly egregious is that sleeping with a girlfriend is legal in certain states where the age of consent is 16 years. In an adjoining state, however, it could put you behind bars, and on the sex offender registry for life.
3
"Gov. Mark Dayton, a Democrat, faced intense criticism before his last election over whether to release from commitment — with strict conditions — a serial rapist who had admitted attacking at least 60 women. "
The fundamental problems seems to be with sentencing. If a sex offender is forever a threat to the society, then he should be locked in prison forever. Shouldn't the criminal above be sentenced to life in prison without parole?
The fundamental problems seems to be with sentencing. If a sex offender is forever a threat to the society, then he should be locked in prison forever. Shouldn't the criminal above be sentenced to life in prison without parole?
51
A sex offender is typically less of a threat than every other criminal except a murderer. Those in the MSOP are a caricature of what a typical sex offender looks like with the hard facts and statistics. The fundamental problem is that help is not available to sex offenders until after they have offended. 95% of child sex abusers do so out of an attraction to children- yet almost every single treatment program for said attraction in this country is aimed at sex offenders. That is a huge problem.
This truly a hard question.
In the novel "Les misérables", a man steals bread to feed his starving family...and end up persecuted for his entire life by the judicial system.
A sexual assault is far more serious than stealing bread, and it makes sense that society want to keep tabs on sexual offenders.
But if the offender has served his sentence, he has to live somewhere. And ideally we either had to pay him a salary to stay home, or he has to find work.
But although we Americans pay less taxes than any other industrialized country, complain bitterly about paying taxes. And it is hard to feel compassion for such offenders, even when we might think they are not merely choosing to offend.
And anytime one person messes up, we want to throw entire programs that have worked under the bus.
I am glad that neither evolution by natural selection nor artificial selection by human societies has brought this problem to my door step.
In the novel "Les misérables", a man steals bread to feed his starving family...and end up persecuted for his entire life by the judicial system.
A sexual assault is far more serious than stealing bread, and it makes sense that society want to keep tabs on sexual offenders.
But if the offender has served his sentence, he has to live somewhere. And ideally we either had to pay him a salary to stay home, or he has to find work.
But although we Americans pay less taxes than any other industrialized country, complain bitterly about paying taxes. And it is hard to feel compassion for such offenders, even when we might think they are not merely choosing to offend.
And anytime one person messes up, we want to throw entire programs that have worked under the bus.
I am glad that neither evolution by natural selection nor artificial selection by human societies has brought this problem to my door step.
2
so I assume you have no issues with him living in your neighborhood? We talk about people's constitutional rights but most communities are frantic when notified that a registered sex offender is living in the area, probably for good reason.
2
I'd really like to know what is the rational for keeping a 93 year old man locked up to the tune of $125,000/yr. Or, why a criminal so dangerous that they cannot be released cannot be sentenced to life? Why do the states have to rely on a system inherently prone to abuse (civil commitment)? Did we not learn anything from civil commitment of the mentally ill? We are taught that Justice is ideally blind. What that should entail is a dispassionate judgement that suits the needs of society, including both perpetrators and victims. Politicians and marketers have learned to manipulate us based on our emotional reactions. It seems that some of us are still fooled by the tough on crime folks that are really not keeping us safer. America is better than this. All who violate our norms deserve a chance at redemption, if not release. Do the crime, serve the time, end of story.
9
The rationale is that it creates a union job in a small town with an economy centered around incarceration, in a state known for its draconian and paternalistic civil commitment laws and practices. The "issue" is not about sex offenders or civil commitment. It's about the fact that Moose Lake and St. Peter have relied on jobs at these institutions for generations now. The names and ostensible purposes of the institutions have changed over the ages, but their role is the same. Even if MSOP closes tomorrow, it will open again the next day with a different name and a slightly different function, but an equal number of union jobs.
6
Unions want jobs.
Private sector wants profits.
Politicians want votes.
=> Small towns love prisons.
Private sector wants profits.
Politicians want votes.
=> Small towns love prisons.
I worked as a licensed professional in the Minnesota civil commitment system, and I am pretty sure that what the clowns in the Department of Human Services will do, if forced to "release" anyone is, they will release their most dangerous guy, knowing he'll commit a crime, and then they'll say "look these men are all dangerous." There are union jobs on the line in Moose Lake and St. Peter, after all. Mark Dayton answers to the unions. End of story.
6
As a criminal defense attorney I was assigned to represent institutionalized "sex offenders" In my 15 years of this assignment, I rarely had a client that the State hospital psychiatrist agreed that is was safe for that person to be released. I've had a few released for a while but ten sent back to the hospital for the most idiotic reasons. I had one child molester who was sent back because he was dating a 40 year old woman who had no children or grandchildren. Why was that a reason for hospitalization? I have had clients that has been in the state hospital for 20 years following a 3 to 7 year prison sentence. The State Hospital system is simply a life sentence in violation of the Constitution.
the system doesn't treat people since there are far too few psychiatrists, Most are either inexperienced or so entrenched in the system that no patient will ever get a positive recommendation.
the system doesn't treat people since there are far too few psychiatrists, Most are either inexperienced or so entrenched in the system that no patient will ever get a positive recommendation.
35
I worked as a prosecutor, prosecuting these types of cases and I agree whole heartedly with you that it is an unconstitutional life sentence. Though we were notified of every sex offender's release from the state and local prison system we would rarely consider moving for civil committment if the offender was a first time offender, the reason being, that part of the analysis is the likelihood of re-offense, which could not realistically be met by a first time offender. So we would really only act on multiple time offenders. I have always believed that if the legislatures wanted to make this type of sentence more constitutional, they should amend the sentencing scheme to include the possibility of a life sentence for a second time sex offender rather than rely on "civil committment" to skirt the constitution. The other thing, and I haven't really read the article all that closely, is that in the jurisdiction where I worked, they were supposed to be reviewed every year to see if they had been rehabilitated to the point where they could be released (kept confined).
1
It is difficult to imagine a more perplexing social problem. The popular spectrum of policy recommendations seems to go from perpetual treatment to summary execution, yet neither seems appropriate for each and every case. At the same time, how many people want to dedicate their professional careers to exploring this problem? The case histories must be punishingly depressing. All of my sympathy goes to those folks brave enough to tackle this issue head-on.
22
It's simple. Non-violent offenders should not be imprisoned or should have token 6-month sentences. Violent offenders should have very long prison sentences. There is no data to support that sex offender therapies work and the risk is to great to the innocent public. We have plenty of resources to warehouse our violent offenders. Let's do it. It is hard to feel sympathy for the worst of the worst.
9
If there ever was a modern witchhunt, it is this one. The child savers and their crusade. We spend billions or millions now on trying to confine sex offenders after they've been caught. It doesn't necessarily deter other people from committing these crimes, but it probably means they will be a little more careful. We focus on "stranger danger" when in fact family members are much more of a threat than strangers.
Meanwhile over 30% of children in American live in poverty (Washington Post), are homeless or have substandard living conditions. We accept that as "just part of life". We know that family violence traumatizes children, but again, it's "just part of life". This issue, however, is different. It must be completely eradicated, exterminated and we must use the scorched earth approach. It's craziness!
Meanwhile over 30% of children in American live in poverty (Washington Post), are homeless or have substandard living conditions. We accept that as "just part of life". We know that family violence traumatizes children, but again, it's "just part of life". This issue, however, is different. It must be completely eradicated, exterminated and we must use the scorched earth approach. It's craziness!
12
So what are you saying? That serial sex offenders should not be prosecuted and committed because it does not deter other serial rapists?
1
So let's see. Someone who commits an armed robbery or some degree of murder is convicted and serves a sentence, with parole available or not, after which he or she [unless serving a genuine life sentence] is released. Someone who has engaged in a sexually based offense (probably because, as the teaser for Law & Order SVU says, sexually-based offenses are considered particularly heinous) is confined more or less forever, regardless of the realistic danger of his re-offending. Something askew there.
7
Here is an issue no elected official will ever want to address in a meaningful way, unless prepared to be branded as "soft on sex offenders." And, of course, looming over the whole issue is the fact that there really is no effective cure or treatment for pedophilia. It is a fixed, stable psychological condition. As others point out, most other sex offenses are not the same and it is unjust to lump them all together as such. What is society to do?
I think APA took the right step in branding pedophilia as a "sexual orientation." In so doing, they attempted to shed light on this complex issue and open a path by which society can address the problem with sensible strategies. But, of course, that designation was widely misinterpreted and scorned by a society that would much rather shove the whole issue under the rug (i.e., indefinite detention).
I think APA took the right step in branding pedophilia as a "sexual orientation." In so doing, they attempted to shed light on this complex issue and open a path by which society can address the problem with sensible strategies. But, of course, that designation was widely misinterpreted and scorned by a society that would much rather shove the whole issue under the rug (i.e., indefinite detention).
30
From the APA website: "The American Psychological Association maintains that pedophilia is a mental disorder; that sex between adults and children is always wrong; and that acting on pedophilic impulses is and should be a criminal act. The American Psychological Association has worked for many years to prevent child sexual abuse and will continue to do so."
There is another comment here claiming sex offenders have a low rate of recidivism. Talk about fantasy! Where on earth do these claims come from? Nothing could be further from the truth. Sex offenders have the highest rates of recidivism -- meaning, they will almost always re-offend.
There is another comment here claiming sex offenders have a low rate of recidivism. Talk about fantasy! Where on earth do these claims come from? Nothing could be further from the truth. Sex offenders have the highest rates of recidivism -- meaning, they will almost always re-offend.
34
You state the crux of the matter in your first paragraph: child molesters cannot be 'cured' with 'treatment'. Released from incarceration, they continue to molest children. The recidivism rate is 100%, no matter what the whiners who purport to speak for them say.
Society has wisely decided exactly how to deal with these predators. Once they're caught (and millions go through life touching kids and never get caught), lock them up forever.
Society has wisely decided exactly how to deal with these predators. Once they're caught (and millions go through life touching kids and never get caught), lock them up forever.
9
mford, I agree with your first sentence; no pol will touch this with a 10 foot poll. Only the justice system itself can create the environment in which pols will be forced to fix it.
I'm generally in favor of reducing prison populations, but a "serial rapist who had admitted attacking at least 60 women" should NEVER be released from prison. How is it that this rapist didn't get a life sentence, and is instead being considered for release from commitment?
136
Because in the past rape was barely even considered a crime. That's what has changed in society.
5
Why is someone who has raped 60 women in prison instead of strapped to the lethal injection table?
2
I fully agree but, What about women have repetitive sex with minor boys? Are they ok in your books.
1
The assumption that is not being talked about is that there will come a time that someone who has, for example, committed a violent rape, will become 'safe'. Perhaps this assumption is false, and another approach is warranted:
People who have developed compassion can change.
Actual psychopaths have proven to be resistant to therapy. You can't cure them.
In both prisons and sex offender facilities we find both types.
Why not put more emphasis on the rehab of normal prisoners?
Let's divide the psychopaths from those who can be cured, across the board.
Why not make space in the prison system by taking people who are not psychopathic and looking at why they are really there. If their crimes were driven by poverty, by drug use due to despair, by psychological problems that had been untreated, by hanging out with the wrong people because of a lack of love elsewhere in their lives - these people can change if they are not further traumatized. Our system takes people who act out from trauma and further traumatizes them. Why not instead give them the chance they never had?
Sweden has proven this works: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/26/prison-sweden-not-punishm...
Psychopaths, on the other hand, will never be 'safe'.
Let's keep every incurable psychopath off the streets forever. Whether they are sex offenders or other types of criminals, this is the real distinction we should be considering.
People who have developed compassion can change.
Actual psychopaths have proven to be resistant to therapy. You can't cure them.
In both prisons and sex offender facilities we find both types.
Why not put more emphasis on the rehab of normal prisoners?
Let's divide the psychopaths from those who can be cured, across the board.
Why not make space in the prison system by taking people who are not psychopathic and looking at why they are really there. If their crimes were driven by poverty, by drug use due to despair, by psychological problems that had been untreated, by hanging out with the wrong people because of a lack of love elsewhere in their lives - these people can change if they are not further traumatized. Our system takes people who act out from trauma and further traumatizes them. Why not instead give them the chance they never had?
Sweden has proven this works: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/26/prison-sweden-not-punishm...
Psychopaths, on the other hand, will never be 'safe'.
Let's keep every incurable psychopath off the streets forever. Whether they are sex offenders or other types of criminals, this is the real distinction we should be considering.
26
Please. First this plan to release nonviolent offenders. That is people who were convicted of nonviolent crimes. It doesn't mean they are nonviolent. It just means that they were not caught or convicted for a violent crime. And even if they were nonviolent then, will they stay that way? And even if they do, do we really want a bunch of burglars and car thieves running around?
And now sex offenders? When we KNOW that the rate of recidivism is very high and that there really is no effective treatment?
Sexual offense IS a crime of violence and one need not be capable of an erection to commit a sexual offense. Please don't tell me that someone over 70 can't molest a child. They can. They do.
And now sex offenders? When we KNOW that the rate of recidivism is very high and that there really is no effective treatment?
Sexual offense IS a crime of violence and one need not be capable of an erection to commit a sexual offense. Please don't tell me that someone over 70 can't molest a child. They can. They do.
40
Please stop perpetuating the myth that recidivism is high and there is no treatment. You are free to make your passionate argument, but leave out disproven assertions that falsely distort the issue.
5
Actually Michael, WT is absolutely correct. Serial rapists and pedophiles suffer from a mental disorder that has no known cure. I'm not talking about the 18 year-old dating a 16 year-old but true pedophiles and serial rapists. Recidivism will occur and the only known "treatment" is chemical castration. That is not really a treatment because the defect is in the mind, not the body. You are probably scoffing while reading this but you should check the facts.
5
Actually Paulo, neither WT nor I said anything about a cure. We were discussing treatment and recidivism, not cure. How many mental or physical illnesses are ever cured? Chemical castration is far from the only effective treatment. Claiming recidivism will occur as if preordained is factually inaccurate and perpetuates the myth. Treatment is aimed at preventing re-offense, not "curing" the mental illness. One does not need the latter to achieve the former.
And I work professionally in this area, so please top telling me to look at the facts. I could send you some journal articles, but let's start with the lay press:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/misunderstood-crimes/
And I work professionally in this area, so please top telling me to look at the facts. I could send you some journal articles, but let's start with the lay press:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/misunderstood-crimes/
4
It is obvious that the original sentences were too short. Instead of slap on the wrist sentences followed by civil commitment, make the punishment actually fit the crime. Rapists and pedophiles should be given life without parole and then there will be no problems. When these criminals get out of prison they endanger the welfare of their victims. Why should the innocent victims have to be worried about a future attack? There is no cure for sexual predators until they are six feet under. Psychiatrists cannot tell if a criminal has truly changed, which is unlikely, or they are just walking the walk and talking the talk. Instead of playing games with what to do with these predators after their sentence, just make it for life without parole; problem solved.
60
@ S.L. I completely agree and wish the NYT would not focus on convicted sex offenders of examples of excessive detention or sentencing. I think that as a group, these sex offenders are far more dangerous than other convicted criminals because of their predatory behaviors against those who are usually much younger and/or weaker than them.
9
States, to solve this problem, need to re-evaluate what constitutes a "Sexual Offense". Rape is a Crime of Violence acted out sexually; Pedophilia is a mental illness, sometimes characterlogical, which has mixed results with "treatment." But what about sibling incest, statutory rape, sexual activity engaged in under-the-influence that results in post encounter guilt, or parental anger that results in someone being charged with a Sex Offense.
Pedophilia between an adult and pre-sexual child is clear. It's not so clear in cases where the "child" is a consenting sexually developed adolescent. Rape is clear when is it a stranger or known individual forces, at the threat of harm, themselves upon someone sexually. It is not so clear when both parties are under the influence, have had a past sexual history, are not 'of age' but have been sexually active together. Further, Statutory Rape may be clear when it occurs between an adult old enough to have fathered the teen, it being consensual; however it is not clear when both are on different sides of the Legal age but both are the at the same emotional and developmental level; especially if the parents knew but objected.
Violence should be treated as violence, pedophilia, as a mental illness, but all of the other "Offenses" which don't quite fit the Spirit of the Law?! Our laws must be rewritten to follow our Psychological understanding of human sexuality if we are to solve this problem.
Scott E. Torquato, MS, LCSW
Pedophilia between an adult and pre-sexual child is clear. It's not so clear in cases where the "child" is a consenting sexually developed adolescent. Rape is clear when is it a stranger or known individual forces, at the threat of harm, themselves upon someone sexually. It is not so clear when both parties are under the influence, have had a past sexual history, are not 'of age' but have been sexually active together. Further, Statutory Rape may be clear when it occurs between an adult old enough to have fathered the teen, it being consensual; however it is not clear when both are on different sides of the Legal age but both are the at the same emotional and developmental level; especially if the parents knew but objected.
Violence should be treated as violence, pedophilia, as a mental illness, but all of the other "Offenses" which don't quite fit the Spirit of the Law?! Our laws must be rewritten to follow our Psychological understanding of human sexuality if we are to solve this problem.
Scott E. Torquato, MS, LCSW
82
"Pedophilia is a mental illness"
Can you specify what exactly is the biological nature of what you are calling pedophilia? And does the term apply when women have sex with minor boys?
Can you specify what exactly is the biological nature of what you are calling pedophilia? And does the term apply when women have sex with minor boys?
If the state wants to detain these people longer, increase the sentences. Once someone who has been convicted of a crime has served his (or her) sentence, they should no longer be incarcerated.
It's called due process.
It's called due process.
64
Pity that so many are more concerned about justice for the sexual predators instead of for their innocent victims.
2
If one these released pedophiles molests another child and one of the parent's kills him, I think it only fair that the District Attorney declines to prosecute.
56
The Catholic church has made us use euphemisms- these guys, just like the priests, arent molesting. They are violently raping children.
In Texas that's how it is done.
If charged, after acquittal the jury would take him out for lunch.
A prosecutor would know he won't get elected again for doing something so dumb. .
If charged, after acquittal the jury would take him out for lunch.
A prosecutor would know he won't get elected again for doing something so dumb. .
And by released pedophiles you mean what, precisely? The only thing a pedophile is 'guilty' of is having pedophilia- if you can really convict a person of having a disorder. I think you meant 'child molesters' or 'child rapists'.
Bring back branding on the cheek
16
Sex offenders have the lowest rate of recidivism of any crime except murder, and most of the time they do reoffend, they are not sex crimes, they are minor probation violations or other crimes. Wikipedia 'sex offender recidivism', see also the US Department of Justice's 2002 study on the same.
The biggest reason sex offenders scare us is that we fear for our children- yet 90% of child sex abuse victims know their abuser, and 95% of perpetrators have an attraction to children (Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute). So stop making help available to people only after they have hurt a child, and make resources and help available to those with the attraction. Focus on preventing it before it happens, not just on catching it after the fact.
The biggest reason sex offenders scare us is that we fear for our children- yet 90% of child sex abuse victims know their abuser, and 95% of perpetrators have an attraction to children (Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute). So stop making help available to people only after they have hurt a child, and make resources and help available to those with the attraction. Focus on preventing it before it happens, not just on catching it after the fact.
41
"Sex offenders were less likely than non-sex offenders to be rearrested for any offense—43 percent of sex offenders versus 68 percent of non-sex offenders. But sex offenders were about four times more likely than non-sex offenders to be arrested for another sex crime after their discharge from prison—5.3 percent of sex offenders versus 1.3 percent of non-sex offenders."
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm
To me, 43% is still a lot especially given that they were four times more likely than the 63% (who were not sex offenders) to be arrested for another sex offense.
Lowest rate is not good enough. "I'm not as bad as someone else" doesn't cut it.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm
To me, 43% is still a lot especially given that they were four times more likely than the 63% (who were not sex offenders) to be arrested for another sex offense.
Lowest rate is not good enough. "I'm not as bad as someone else" doesn't cut it.
7
@WastingTime, the 43% rate is arrests for any crime. We're not keeping sex offenders in civil commitment to prevent them from committing burglary though, are we? We're doing it to prevent another sex crime. For that, the number is 5.3%.
So, 19 out of 20 sex offenders we keep in civil commitment wouldn't commit another sex crime if released. Does that seem right?
Sure, when we release 100 burglary felons at the end of their sentences only 1 of those 100 will commit a sex crime. But in either case, ever letting anyone out means recidivism, including sex crimes.
Shall we just lock everyone up and throw away the key?
So, 19 out of 20 sex offenders we keep in civil commitment wouldn't commit another sex crime if released. Does that seem right?
Sure, when we release 100 burglary felons at the end of their sentences only 1 of those 100 will commit a sex crime. But in either case, ever letting anyone out means recidivism, including sex crimes.
Shall we just lock everyone up and throw away the key?
1
its the other way around- they have the highest rate, not lowest.. check the stats.
4
They are all dangerous.
Howze about government proactively (sort of) protect women and children, for once? Given these men relished being predators and cannot be "fixed", they will always pose a danger to the most vulnerable and innocent in our society. Protecting the innocent is the job of a nation and of the government. While we're at it, plow some money into researching what is broken in the brain of millions of men who enjoy predatory criminal behavior, as do their sons - repeating the cycle all the while most Americans add every security system to their life possible, as the number of traumatized victims pile up and as far too many families are left visiting their loved one at the cemetery.
Howze about government proactively (sort of) protect women and children, for once? Given these men relished being predators and cannot be "fixed", they will always pose a danger to the most vulnerable and innocent in our society. Protecting the innocent is the job of a nation and of the government. While we're at it, plow some money into researching what is broken in the brain of millions of men who enjoy predatory criminal behavior, as do their sons - repeating the cycle all the while most Americans add every security system to their life possible, as the number of traumatized victims pile up and as far too many families are left visiting their loved one at the cemetery.
50
What about the hundreds of thousands of female predators (many hide in the school and juvenile prison system where there are upwards of 900,000 incidents of adults having sex with minors and over 90% of them are women predators according to the DOJ) that get away every year without even a blemish on their record? That is truly one of the only examples of Rape Culture existing in the US.
1
Most victims of the most brutal crimes, carried out mainly by men, are themselves men. Presumably, that's OK. How could any man, even if nominal victim, possibly be innocent of anything? If a man is brutally murdered or assaulted by another man, or by a woman, then he must have deserved it.
1
First of all, sex offenders are not nearly as dangerous as those with assault on their record. The recidivism rate of over 9000 sex offenders released in 30 states over a three year followup period was... drumroll... a whopping 3-5%, the 3% being sexual crimes. That is from a 2002 Department of Justice study.
Second, they have 'plowed some money into researching what is broken in the brain'. There are a number of organizations out there- Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute and Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers are the big two. They have a long list of policy recommendations- yet none of them have yet been followed. Google both.
Finally, the 'cycle of abuse' is a myth. Less than 40% of those abused as children go on to abuse other children. As long as people perpetuate myths about this topic, nothing preventative will happen. Get real facts at either of the above organizations, or Stop It Now.
Second, they have 'plowed some money into researching what is broken in the brain'. There are a number of organizations out there- Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute and Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers are the big two. They have a long list of policy recommendations- yet none of them have yet been followed. Google both.
Finally, the 'cycle of abuse' is a myth. Less than 40% of those abused as children go on to abuse other children. As long as people perpetuate myths about this topic, nothing preventative will happen. Get real facts at either of the above organizations, or Stop It Now.
24/7 precise GPS monitoring for life seems both less costly and nearly equally effective as assured of capture, conviction, and severe sentencing should deter most.
11
Never mind the fact that the definition of a sex offender can vary widely from state to state. And the list of ways to become a sex offender has continued to expand over the years.
A 21-year old with a 17 year old girlfriend would be considered a sex offender in some states, while they would have commited no offense at all in 30 out of 50 states.
In some states, skinny-dipping at a secluded country swimming hole can get you on the sex offenders list.
A 21-year old with a 17 year old girlfriend would be considered a sex offender in some states, while they would have commited no offense at all in 30 out of 50 states.
In some states, skinny-dipping at a secluded country swimming hole can get you on the sex offenders list.
20