U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics

National Conference on Registries

Proceedings of a BJS/SEARCH conference

Papers presented by

Patty Wetterling Ralph C. Thomas Kirk Lonbom Dr. Jan M. Chaiken Elizabeth A. Pearson Mike Welter Marlene Beckman Dena T. Sacco Norm Maleng Lisa Gursky Sorkin Robert R. Belair Rep. Mike Lawlor Donna Feinberg Floyd Epps Sen. Florence Shapiro James C. Swain Kathy J. Canestrini Roxanne Lieb Emmet A. Rathbun Doug Smith Scott A. Cooper Donna M. Uzzell

Criminal Justice Information Policy U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries

Proceedings of a BJS/SEARCH conference

April 1998, NCJ-168965

Papers presented by

Patty Wetterling Ralph C. Thomas Kirk Lonbom Dr. Jan M. Chaiken Elizabeth A. Pearson Mike Welter Marlene Beckman Dena T. Sacco Norm Maleng Lisa Gursky Sorkin Robert R. Belair Rep. Mike Lawlor Donna Feinberg Floyd Epps Sen. Florence Shapiro James C. Swain Kathy J. Canestrini Roxanne Lieb Emmet A. Rathbun Doug Smith Scott A. Cooper Donna M. Uzzell U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics

Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. Director

Acknowledgments This report was prepared by SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics, Kenneth E. Bischoff, Chairman, and Gary R. Cooper, Executive Director. The project director was Sheila J. Barton, Deputy Director. Twyla R. Cunningham, Manager, and Eric C. Johnson, Writer/Researcher, Corporate Communications, edited the proceedings. Jane L. Bassett, Publishing Assistant, provided layout and design assistance. The federal project monitor was Carol G. Kaplan, Chief, National Criminal History Improvement Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Report of work performed under BJS Grant No. 96-BJ-CX-K010, awarded to SEARCH Group, Inc., 7311 Greenhaven Drive, Suite 145, Sacramento, California 95831. Contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Bureau of Justice Statistics or the U.S. Department of Justice. Copyright © SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics, 1998. The U.S. Department of Justice authorizes any person to reproduce, publish, translate or otherwise use all or any part of the copyrighted material in this publication with the exception of those items indicating they are copyrighted or printed by any source other than SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics.

ii Contents

Foreword, v

Introduction, vii

Keynote address Patty Wetterling The Jacob Wetterling story, 3

Nature and management of the problem Dr. Jan M. Chaiken Sex offenders and offending: Learning more from national data collection programs, 8

Federal panel: Wetterling Act/Megan’s compliance issues Marlene Beckman Panel introduction, 15

Lisa Gursky Sorkin The trilogy of Federal , 16

Donna Feinberg Justice Department guideline changes and clarifications, 19

James C. Swain Applying for a compliance deadline extension, 22

Federal panel members Panel question-and-answer session, 24

Federal funding support Dr. Jan M. Chaiken Federal funding support for sex offender registries, 31

FBI panel: Interim and permanent solutions Emmet A. Rathbun History and current status of a national , 37

Ralph C. Thomas The impact of the Lychner Act, 40

Overview of current State Elizabeth A. Pearson Status and latest developments in sex offender registration and notification laws, 45

Litigation issues Dena T. Sacco Arguments used to challenge notification laws — and the government’s response, 50

Pending Robert R. Belair Status of Federal legislation on sex offenders and changes to current laws, 54

Panel of the States: Systems for the registration of sex offenders Floyd Epps Review of the New York State Sex Offender Registration Act, 59

Kathy J. Canestrini The method of risk assessment used for the New York State Sex Offender Registration Act, 61

Doug Smith California’s history of sex offender registration requirements and response to new Federal mandates, 64

Donna M. Uzzell The Florida sex offender registration and notification system, 68

iii Kirk Lonbom The Illinois registration and notification system for sex offenders, 72

Mike Welter Development of the Illinois sex offender registration and community notification program, 75

The local responsibility Norm Maleng The local responsibility for control and prosecution of sex offenders: Behind Washington State’s history of landmark sex offender laws, 81

Panel of the States: Enacting legislation Rep. Mike Lawlor Creating effective sex offender legislation requires collaboration between lawmakers and justice agencies, 87

Sen. Florence Shapiro The big picture of sex offenders and public policy, 92

Panel of the States: Community notification and verification practices Roxanne Lieb The State of Washington study of the efficacy of notification laws, 101

Scott A. Cooper Community notification and verification practices in three States, 103

Contributors’ biographies, 109

Appendix, 117

iv Foreword

Americans have become deadlines risked losing 10 percent National Conference on Sex increasingly angry in recent years of their appropriation from the Offender Registries, held July 16- in response to a series of violent Federal Edward Byrne Memorial 17, 1997, in Bellevue, Washington. and highly publicized sexual State and Local Law Enforcement This publication presents the assaults, primarily against children, Assistance Program, which proceedings of that 2-day committed by individuals with provides funding for State and local conference. extensive prior sexual offense eradication efforts. The conference featured histories. This outrage has been Compliance was complicated by presentations by Federal officials intensified by the perception, the fact that both Megan’s Law and who explained the requirements of justified or not, that systems the Lychner Act amended portions the registration and notification traditionally used by justice of the Wetterling Act, creating statutes in detail and who answered agencies to monitor law-breakers confusion as to whether the the questions of State returned to the community do not requirements of one representatives. Representatives adequately protect the public from superceded those of another. There from several States presented that unique category of individual were also questions as to whether information on programs that their known as the sex offender. the registration and notification States had implemented in response Seeking to address the public’s programs, once implemented, to the Federal requirements. concern, the U.S. Congress would survive constitutional Elected officials provided a established three statutes that challenges based on claims of legislative perspective to the collectively require States to excessive , invasion of proceedings, and experts updated strengthen the procedures they use privacy and denial of due process. participants on the status of legal to keep track of sex offenders: the Another hurdle was the growing challenges to registration and Jacob Wetterling Against number of individuals who fell notification programs. Children and Sexually Violent under the statutes’ requirements. Many of the problems and issue Offender Registration Act (enacted According to data compiled by the areas identified in these in 1994), the Federal version of Bureau of Justice Statistics, the proceedings were subsequently “Megan’s Law” (enacted in 1996), number of sex offenders jumped addressed or ameliorated in Federal and the Pam Lychner Sexual 300 percent between 1980 and legislation and regulations. Offender Tracking and 1994. In 1994, there were The issue of sex offending is as Identification Act (also enacted in approximately 234,000 sex sensitive and emotionally charged 1996). offenders under the care, custody or as any faced by society. The In brief, the statutes require control of corrections agencies — federally required programs are States to establish registration 60 percent under conditional relatively new or redesigned programs so local law enforcement supervision in the community — approaches to controlling sex will know the whereabouts of sex on any given day. offenders, and a period of time offenders released into their States experiencing difficulty must elapse before quantitative , and notification meeting the compliance deadlines study can be conducted to ascertain programs so the public can be were given the opportunity to whether they are effective. I hope warned about sex offenders living request 2-year, “good-faith-effort” these proceedings serve during this in the community. (The Lychner extensions. Forty-two of the 56 period as a valuable reference tool Act also requires the creation of a States and territories required to and also as a contribution to the national sex offender registry, and comply with the statutes requested ongoing debate over the methods it requires the FBI to handle deadline extensions. It appeared the used to control sex offenders. registration in States that lack States needed guidance and “minimally sufficient” programs.) clarification to help them comply The States were assigned a with the registration and difficult task. They were given until notification statutes. September 1997 to comply with the To assist the States, the Bureau Wetterling Act and Megan’s Law, of Justice Statistics, along with and until October 1999 to comply SEARCH, The National Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. with the Lychner Act. Those that Consortium for Justice Information Director failed to meet the compliance and Statistics, cosponsored the

v Introduction

In October 1989, 11-year-old establish stringent registration travel their neighborhood freely if Jacob Wetterling bicycled with his programs for sex offenders — they had been alerted to the brother and a friend to a store near including life-long registration for a presence of a convicted sex his St. Joseph, , home to subclass of offenders classified as offender living across the street rent a video. Ten months later, sexual predators — by September from their residence. Congress real estate agent Pam 1997. passed the Federal version of Lychner prepared to show a vacant Awaiting Lychner at the vacant “Megan’s Law,” another residence to a prospective buyer. In house was a twice-convicted felon amendment to the Violent Crime July 1994, Megan Kanka, age 7, who brutally assaulted the former Control and Law Enforcement Act accepted an invitation from a flight attendant. Her life was saved of 1994, in 1996.3 It required States neighbor in Hamilton Township, when her husband arrived on the to establish some form of New Jersey, to see his new puppy. scene and interrupted the attack. community notification by As they went about their daily The experience motivated Lychner September 1997. routines, Wetterling, Lychner and to form Justice for All, a Texas- The process of instituting a Kanka could not have known they based victims’ rights advocacy nationally consistent policy to were fated to become crime group that lobbies for tougher control sex offenders is complex. victims, or that their names would sentences for violent criminals. One of the greatest challenges is ultimately become synonymous U.S. Senators Phil Gramm of the sheer magnitude of the with Federal laws mandating more Texas and Joseph Biden of problem. Recent figures show that, stringent control of sex offenders. Delaware credited Lychner with nationally, approximately 234,000 Wetterling’s ride home was helping to craft the language of a sex offenders are under the care, interrupted by an armed man bill that established a national custody or control of corrections wearing a nylon mask who ordered computer database to track sex agencies — 60 percent under the boy’s companions to flee. offenders. The bill was named the conditional supervision in the Wetterling has not been seen since. Pam Lychner Sexual Offender community — on any given day. Investigators later learned that, Tracking and Identification Act of The FBI, directed by the unbeknownst to local law 19962 to honor the activist after she Lychner Act to register sex enforcement, halfway houses in St. and her two daughters were killed offenders and to notify Joseph housed sex offenders after in the explosion of TWA Flight 800 communities in States lacking their release from prison. off the coast of Long Island, New “minimally sufficient” programs, Wetterling’s disappearance York, in July 1996. The Lychner used fugitive statistics from four transformed his mother, Patty, a Act amended the Violent Crime California field divisions (San self-described “stay-at-home Control and Law Enforcement Act Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco mom,” into a tireless advocate for of 1994 to require the Federal and Sacramento) and information missing children. She was Bureau of Investigation to establish on noncompliant sex offenders appointed to a governor’s task the national offender database and from the State’s Department of force that recommended stronger to handle sex offender registration Justice to study the assignment’s sex offender registration and notification in States unable to impact on its resources. The study requirements in Minnesota. maintain “minimally sufficient” found that, if the FBI were made The more stringent requirements programs of their own. The responsible for administering were subsequently implemented on Lychner Act compliance deadline California’s program, every agent a national basis when the Jacob is October 1999. working in the four divisions at the Wetterling Crimes Against The neighbor who invited time of the study would have to be Children and Sexually Violent Megan Kanka to see his puppy was assigned full-time just to track Offender Registration Act was a twice-convicted pedophile who down sex offenders who failed to included in the Federal Violent raped and murdered her, then register as required. Crime Control and Law dumped her body in a nearby park. There are thorny legal issues to Enforcement Act of 1994.1 The Megan’s grieving parents said they consider as well. Individuals Wetterling Act required States to never would have let their daughter subject to registration and

1 42 U.S.C. ¤ 14071. 2 42 U.S.C. ¤ 14072. 3 104 P.L. 145, 100 Stat. 1345.

vii notification programs have and notification programs, and also concluded with an overview of the challenged the statutes on to provide a forum where various notification options constitutional grounds, citing representatives from a number of available to States, from passive excessive punishment, lack of due States could exchange ideas and (where the public seeks out process and invasion of privacy. compare experiences. Speakers information) to aggressive (where The have generally upheld educated State representatives on the offender is required to notify registration requirements, but the requirements of the sex neighbors of his presence). several courts have struck down offender-related Federal statutes, Mrs. Patty Wetterling, advocate notification programs. Many updated participants on new for missing children and cofounder observers believe the notification legislation and legal challenges to of the Jacob Wetterling controversy will not be resolved the current statutes, and provided as Foundation, delivered the until the U.S. Supreme examples programs that several conference’s “Keynote address,” in settles the matter. States implemented in response to which she related the details of her Designing an effective sex the Federal mandates. son’s abduction and the emotional offender registration and Presenters included officials highs and lows that accompanied notification program that can from the U.S. Department of the aftermath. She discussed the withstand legal challenges while Justice and the FBI, representatives creation of the Jacob Wetterling meeting the needs of the from State and national criminal Foundation, which aids in the community is difficult, especially justice organizations, and State search for missing children, and within the relatively short time legislators and other State-level also the concern for individual periods for compliance spelled out officials. Mrs. Patty Wetterling rights elected officials expressed in the Federal statutes. States that provided the keynote address. This when a task force of which Mrs. failed to meet the statutes’ document presents the proceedings Wetterling was a member compliance deadlines risked losing of that conference. (Sex offenders recommended stringent registration 10 percent of their appropriation are referred to in the male gender requirements for convicted sex from the Federal Edward Byrne throughout these proceedings, as offenders. Memorial State and Local Law more than 99 percent of convicted The next speaker, BJS Director Enforcement Assistance Program, sex offenders are men.) Dr. Jan M. Chaiken, discussed the which provides funding for State Day One of the conference general topic of the “Nature and and local crime eradication efforts. focused primarily on the sex management of the problem,” in The statutes allowed States offender problem from a Federal particular what information experiencing difficulty in perspective. A panel of U.S. Justice national data collection programs establishing programs to apply for Department officials discussed can provide on sex offenders and a 2-year, “good-faith-effort” various aspects of the Federal offending. He provided a detailed deadline extension. Forty-two of statutes and conducted an statistical overview of violent sex the 56 States and territories covered informative question-and-answer crimes — including murders, by the statutes sought the session to address the specific assaults on children, rape and the extensions. concerns of individual States. Day criminal histories of sex offenders To help States design Two began with a presentation by — to establish a national context on constitutionally viable programs FBI representatives concerning which to proceed with the that meet Federal mandates, and to preparations the Bureau is taking to conference. contribute to the national debate assume control of registration and Dr. Chaiken reported that of the over the issue of controlling sex notification functions in States 95,000 sex offenders in State offenders, the Bureau of Justice unable to establish their own prisons, 60,000 most likely Statistics (BJS), U.S. Department effective programs. committed their violent sex crimes of Justice, and SEARCH, The The agenda then moved to a against children under age 18. The National Consortium for Justice State perspective. Representatives majority of those serving time for Information and Statistics, from several States explained violent sex offenses against cosponsored the National procedures and programs their children committed their crimes Conference on Sex Offender States adopted in response to the against victims age 12 or under. He Registries, held in Bellevue, Federal mandates. State and local endorsed the implementation of the Washington, on July 16-17, 1997. elected officials enlightened National Incident-Based Reporting The conference sought to provide conference participants on the System, which collects more the States with tools needed to legislative response to public detailed crime information, leading implement effective registration demands for action. The conference

viii to higher quality crime data and, whereabouts and movements of sex “Interim and permanent solutions” ultimately, stronger laws. offenders, it requires the FBI to by two FBI representatives: Mr. Next, a panel of U.S. Justice handle sex offender registration in Emmet A. Rathbun, Unit Chief, Department officials explained States that fail to meet the Act’s Criminal Justice Information compliance issues associated with definition of “minimally sufficient” Services (CJIS) Division, and Mr. the Wetterling Act and Megan’s systems, and it amends the Ralph C. Thomas, Supervisory Law. The panel was comprised of Wetterling Act to make registration Special Agent, Policy, Planning Ms. Marlene Beckman, Special requirements more stringent. and Analysis Unit, Criminal Counsel, Office of Justice In her presentation, Ms. Investigative Division. Programs (OJP); Ms. Lisa Gursky Feinberg explained the various Mr. Rathbun spoke on the FBI’s Sorkin, Chief of Staff, Office of registration and notification efforts to establish a National Policy Development; Ms. Donna methods States could implement to Sexual Offender Registry, Feinberg, Office of General comply with the Federal mandates. indicating that the CJIS Advisory Counsel, OJP; and Mr. James C. Not all States utilize the same Policy Board (APB) initiated Swain, Director, State and Local procedures, Ms. Feinberg said, and discussions in 1995 on the benefits Assistance Division, Bureau of variations of programs can be used of such a registry and began to Justice Assistance (BJA). as long as the basics of the three consider where it should be housed. Ms. Beckman served as panel statutes are met. She also explained Since the Wetterling Act already moderator and also provided a brief the steps a State needs to follow to directed States to develop offender update on the States’ progress in apply for a 2-year, “good-faith- databases, the APB decided to implementing registration and effort” compliance deadline recommend the creation of an notification laws in response to the extension. index at the National Crime Federal mandates. According to Mr. Swain elaborated on Ms. Information Center (NCIC) listing Ms. Beckman, 39 States had sex Feinberg’s comments on deadline the State database or agency that offender registration programs extension applications, and maintained the detailed registrant prior to the enactment of the Jacob explained the process BJA staff information. Sensing no urgency Wetterling Act; now, all 50 States would use to evaluate extension for the national registry, the APB have registration programs in place. requests. Panel presentations were delayed action until the She added that only 6 States had followed by a question-and-answer implementation of NCIC 2000, Mr. enacted community notification session, which provided an Rathbun said. laws prior to passage of the Federal opportunity for individual State He said the timetable changed version of Megan’s Law, but as of representatives to seek solutions for when President Clinton issued a July 1997, 45 States had passed their unique problems. directive in June 1996 instructing notification legislation. Dr. Chaiken’s second address — the Attorney General to prepare in Ms. Sorkin spoke next on the “Federal funding support for sex 2 months a plan to implement a interrelationship between the three offender registries” — concluded national sexual predator and child Federal statutes. She explained that Day One of the conference. He molester registration system. The the Jacob Wetterling Act places indicated that programs to improve directive made it necessary for the four major obligations on States: sex offender registries would most FBI to develop an interim national they must require certain offenders likely be coordinated with ongoing registry until NCIC 2000 is to register, maintain accurate efforts to improve criminal history delivered. He said the FBI’s interim registries, maintain and distribute records through the National solution called for a link from the registry information to law Criminal History Improvement National Law Enforcement enforcement, and disclose Program, which the BJS has Telecommunications System information to the public when administered since 1995. He also (which is used to track Federal necessary for public safety. said that if the Federal statutes are parolees and probationers) to each Megan’s Law then amended the to achieve their desired results, State’s sex offender database. The Wetterling Act to make community proper safeguards must be designed FBI delivered the interim notification mandatory rather than so the public receives the provisions for use in February at the discretion of law information it needs while 1997, he added. enforcement. restricted information is made Mr. Thomas spoke on the “very She added that the Pam Lychner available only to individuals serious implications” of the Act added three more requirements: authorized to view it. Lychner Act provision requiring it obligates the FBI to establish a Day Two of the Conference the FBI to handle sex offender national database to track the began with presentations on registration in States that lack

ix “minimally sufficient” programs. Ms. Dena T. Sacco, an attorney requirements to military and He said it was difficult to measure with the U.S. Justice Department, Federal offenders, and improve the the provision’s impact as it had not spoke next on litigation issues, in ability to track offenders who live yet been determined how many particular, “Arguments used to in one State but work in another. States needed assistance, although challenge notification laws — and The next portion of the agenda, it appeared there were more than the government’s response.” She “Panel of the States: Systems for originally anticipated. According to said Federal registration and the registration of sex offenders,” Mr. Thomas, registration notification statutes were usually featured presentations from New responsibilities, address challenged on three constitutional York, California, Florida and verification, the search for non- claims: excessive punishment, Illinois officials on the sex offender compliant offenders and invasion of privacy and lack of due registration and notification community notification placed a process. programs their States implemented significant burden on FBI State and Federal governments in response to the Federal statutes. resources. countered that the laws were not Mr. Floyd Epps and Ms. Kathy J. Ms. Elizabeth A. Pearson, Staff designed for punishment but for Canestrini, members of the New Associate and Congressional community protection and that York State Board of Sex Offender Liaison for the National Criminal most of the information released Examiners, discussed an Justice Association, spoke next, during notification was already a assessment process their program providing an overview of current matter of public record, Ms. Sacco uses to estimate the risk of State sex offender registration and said. Governments also argued that reoffense by offenders released into notification laws. Ms. Pearson said there were no constitutionally the community. Factors such as most State programs contained protected privacy interests, and that prior , number of these common features: due process protections did not victims, victim age and other issues • The State maintained the apply to the statutes because they were considered by the Board when registry but information is did not threaten the liberty of assigning a risk level of 1 to 3 to a supplied by local law registrants. released offender. The risk level enforcement agencies; Ms. Sacco said several lower determined the breadth of • Information typically collected courts and the Kansas Supreme notification. As of July 1997, the included the offender’s name, Court have struck down Board assigned a Level 3 risk address, photograph, birth date notification statutes, and she assessment — the highest level and social security number; predicted that the issue may not be possible — to 52 percent of the • The timeframe to register ran resolved until it is considered by 1,540 cases it reviewed. Thirty-nine from immediately after release the U.S. Supreme Court. percent received a Level 2 risk to 30 days after release; SEARCH General Counsel assessment and 9 percent received • Most registries were updated Robert R. Belair spoke next on the a Level 1 assessment. only when an offender status of two pieces of legislation Mr. Doug Smith, Chief of the changed his address; and currently before the Congress Bureau of Criminal Information • Most laws applied equally to which would clarify portions of the and Analysis for the California offenders who were convicted Wetterling Act relating to Department of Justice, related the in other States. registration requirements.4 Mr. history of sex offender laws in his Ms. Pearson then discussed Belair said enactment of the State, which in 1947 became the differences in State programs and legislation would enhance the first in the Nation to require reviewed the history and evolution flexibility of current registration offenders to register. California’s of registration and notification requirements, extend reporting version of Megan’s Law was laws. She said California passed in September 1996, Mr. established the first sex offender Smith said. Notification was registry in 1947 and that 38 States provided by way of a CD-ROM, 4 The legislation is H.R. 1683 and S. had established registries since 767, both titled the Jacob Wetterling which listed 64,000 registered sex 1994. The State of Washington Crimes Against Children and Sexually offenders and was available to view created the first notification law in Violent Offenders Registration at 400 locations. Information will 1990, Ms. Pearson said, and as of Improvement Act of 1997. The U.S. be updated four times a year, and July 1997, only five States had not House of Representatives passed H.R. the State adds approximately 3,000 implemented notification 1683 on September 23, 1997, and sent new registrants annually. procedures. it to the Senate. The Senate, According to Mr. Smith, California meanwhile, referred S. 767 to its also allowed police to notify Judiciary Committee on May 20, 1997.

x possible at-risk individuals and the • Third, any person authorized to advised elected officials to consult community at large when a view the sex offender registry with a wide variety of criminal registered sex offender was nearby. could access on-line justice professionals before writing Ms. Donna M. Uzzell, Director information at any local police legislation to address sex offense of Criminal Justice Information department or sheriff’s office. and other crime-related problems. Services for the Florida Department The aggressive nature of the Sen. Shapiro said she became of Law Enforcement (FDLE), Illinois registration program was involved in sex offense issues discussed the history and demonstrated by the fact that following the 1993 murder of 7- implementation of her State’s among those registered were an 86- year-old Ashley Estelle, who was registration and notification year-old man, a quadriplegic, an snatched from a playground while programs. Ms. Uzzell said Florida’s individual in the Federal Witness her parents were nearby. The registration program was initiated Protection Program, and a man in a murderer was a convicted sex in 1993 and was amended several coma at the time of registration, offender released from prison times to add and expand Mr. Welter said. shortly before the crime after notification features. The FDLE King County (Washington) serving only 17 months of a 10- maintains a World Wide Web site Prosecutor Norm Maleng provided year , Sen. Shapiro said. where users can search for a local perspective on controlling She said an investigation revealed registered sex offenders by county, and prosecuting sex offenders. He 34 specific errors made by the city or by the offender’s last said Washington State enacted the Texas criminal justice system in the name.5 Florida also provides a toll- Nation’s first notification law in prosecution and incarceration of the free telephone number that 1990. Mr. Maleng said the law was man prior to the murder of Ashley residents can call to determine prompted by several highly Estelle. whether any registered offenders publicized sex crimes committed The incident provided Texas live in their communities.6 by individuals with long sex with three harsh lessons, Sen. Presentations by Illinois State offense histories who received no Shapiro said: Police officials Mr. Kirk Lonbom, treatment while incarcerated. Mr. 1. Clear communication between Assistant Chief of the Intelligence Maleng discussed the importance agencies is critical to ensure Bureau, and Mr. Mike Welter, of registration programs as an aid proper monitoring of offenders Chief of the Violent Crimes to investigations and related a story as they move from one Section, concluded the panel on concerning the quick apprehension agency’s responsibility to State registration and notification of a suspect in an attempted rape another. systems. who was tracked down by officers 2. Sound public policy is crucial Mr. Lonbom said Illinois used using registry information. to the enactment of effective two statewide electronic In a second panel of the States, laws to control sex offenders. information systems to keep track Rep. Mike Lawlor of the 3. A comprehensive legislative of sex offenders. Mr. Welter, in General Assembly and and administrative approach turn, reported that notification was Sen. Florence Shapiro of the Texas that takes in all factors of sex carried out in three phases: State Senate explained the offending is necessary to • First, each school and child- legislative response to community create and implement care facility was given a list of pressure for action. successful programs. sex offenders living in the In a frank presentation, Rep. The conference concluded with county where the school or Lawlor revealed that the a final panel of the States that facility is located. Connecticut Legislature’s rush to focused on community notification • Second, each law enforcement implement sex offender programs and verification practices agency in Illinois had the resulted in several mistakes that throughout the country. Panel discretion to provide sex took several subsequent legislative members Ms. Roxanne Lieb, offender information to any sessions to correct. He said Director of the Washington State group or individual likely to legislators were unaware, for Institute of Public Policy, and Mr. encounter the offender. example, that most individuals tried Scott A. Cooper, Staff Attorney for sex crimes against children in with the National Criminal Justice Connecticut are convicted of “risk Association, discussed sex offender 5 of injury to a minor,” which was programs that various States have The Web address is: left off a list created by the implemented. www.fdle.state.fl.us/. legislature of crimes that carried a Ms. Lieb also provided the 6 The toll-free number is: 1-888-357- registration requirement. He results of a recent Washington 3332 (or 1-888-FL-PREDATOR).

xi State study that examined the New Jersey, like New York, impact of notification programs on uses a risk assessment scale to the patterns of sex determine the level of notification offenders released from for released offenders, he said. incarceration. She said the study Several court decisions based on compared the rearrest rates of a constitutional challenges helped group of offenders released before clarify New Jersey’s law. notification procedures were Mention and thanks are given implemented to those of a group of here to Mr. Ronald P. Hawley, who offenders released after notification ably served as conference procedures were in place. moderator. Mr. Hawley is Assistant According to Ms. Lieb, the Director of the North Carolina study found that the two groups Bureau of Investigation’s Division committed about the same number of Criminal Information and is also of new sex offenses, but those who Chair of SEARCH’s Law and committed new offenses after Policy Project Advisory notification procedures were in Committee. place were arrested after spending 2 to 2 1/2 years in the community compared to about 5 years for the other set of offenders. Mr. Cooper discussed the approaches three States have taken to comply with Federal sex offender mandates. He said Alaska provides passive notification, which requires interested parties to submit information request forms and pay a $10 fee, while Louisiana’s notification law is unique in that it requires the offender to conduct his own notification to every residence or business in a one-mile radius in rural areas, or to every residence or business in a three-block area in urban areas. Louisiana courts can also require a convicted offender to put a bumper sticker on his car or wear clothing indicating that he is a convicted sex offender, although that provision of the law had not been enforced as of July 1997, Mr. Cooper said.

xii Keynote address

The Jacob Wetterling story Patty Wetterling

Nature and management of the problem

Sex offenders and offending: Learning more from national data collection programs Dr. Jan M. Chaiken The Jacob Wetterling story

PATTY WETTERLING Children’s Rights Advocate The Jacob Wetterling Foundation

I am truly honored to be a part We have had a dream for Jacob The next call came from a of this very exciting opportunity to for 7 1/2 years. I thought it might neighbor’s dad who told us two of make the sex offender registries be helpful to share with you where the kids came back from the store, law better and more workable in sex offender registry legislation but somebody had taken Jacob. every State. A complete stranger came from and why it is so critical They were biking home from the sent me a verse from a song called for us. store when they looked up and saw “Hope,” which we have lived on My husband and I went to a a man with a gun standing in the for the last 7 1/2 years. It is about housewarming party on October road. He told the kids to get off of beginnings. I would like to start 22, 1989. We called home to give their bikes and to lie down in the with that. the children the phone number ditch or he would shoot them. He Hope is intimately tied to where we were. My son, Trevor, asked their ages, which is still beginnings, of this I’m answered the telephone and we confusing to me. Trevor was 10 certain. You’re not going to gave him the number. years old and Aaron and Jacob start anything without hope Our older daughter was not were 11 years old. The man with of a successful conclusion. home that night. Jacob, his best the gun told Trevor to run into the Unless you hope strongly, friend, Aaron, and Trevor were woods as fast as he could or he intensely enough, you may babysitting their younger sister, would shoot him, so Trevor took never start at all. In any Carmen. Trevor called back and off. He said the exact same words endeavor, two-thirds of the said, “We’re bored. There’s to Aaron, and Aaron took off. But battle is won simply by nothing to do. Can we ride our as Aaron was leaving, he saw the taking the first step. All too bikes to the store and rent a video?” man grab Jacob’s shoulder. When often through the years I’ve From our house to the video store Aaron caught up to Trevor and they let myself be held back by is less than 10 minutes by bike. We felt safe enough to turn around and lack of confidence, fear of live in a town of 3,000 people, but I look back, Jacob and the man were failure, sometimes just plain said no. It was starting to get dark, gone. inertia or laziness. But I’ve and they had never done this Nobody saw the man’s face. He learned that if you force before. Trevor said, “Well, let me wore a mask. They did track yourself to make the first talk to Dad.” My husband, Jerry Jacob’s footsteps to where a car move, mighty forces will said, “If you wear my jogging vest had been parked, so they know they come to aid. The act of (which is reflective) and take a left in a car. It was a generic tire beginning starts the flow of flashlight, and put a white track on a dusty, gravel road in power, but those who never sweatshirt on Aaron, and if you go October. The police have gathered begin never feel that power. straight to the store and come little information since then; Between hope and action lies straight back, it should be okay.” basically, we have no more than we a chasm deep but also I truly believe it should have had that very first night. narrow. It can be bridged by been okay. They called another No matter what preparations you an act of will, a decision that time. I do not know if any of you make, nothing prepares you for a says firmly, “Yes, I will take are parents, but this was the third high-profile investigation of a steps to make this hope a time we talked to our kids that missing child case. One local reality, and I will take the night. “Carmen doesn’t want to television station assembled a film first step now.” Hope, the go,” the kids said. “Is it okay if clip of activities during the first spark that ignites the actions Rochelle comes over to babysit?” year Jacob was missing. The clip that make the dream come These were responsible kids who shows I was blessed with a sheriff true. arranged a babysitter for their who left no stone unturned. He had younger sister. been a sheriff for years and years. He called in 20-year-old favors,

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 3 asking, “Can you do this for me?” asked a lot of questions. I still ask event in his life which would have He pulled in everybody. questions. I think one of the precipitated the high-risk approach We had our State crime bureau, complicated issues is that most taken in this crime. The high-risk the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal people are ignorant about those approach also indicates the Apprehension (BCA), involved. who violate children. We do not offender may have attempted The FBI became involved the first function in their world, which is similar acts recently and failed. The night because Jacob’s classmate why sex offenders continue to find offender is likely to be in an was the son of an FBI agent and victims. unskilled or semi-skilled job that because there was a weapon used. When Jacob was abducted, law does not include contact with the They knew this was an unusual enforcement had no experience public. Persons who know the case right away. running a missing child offender would likely notice The police used all-terrain investigation. Police train for all heightened anxiety on the vehicles and horses to search for kinds of situations, but at that point, offender’s part since the crime Jacob. Everybody in the entire 7 years ago, there was not much occurred.” Midwest was aware of his training for this type of “What do you need?” I asked abduction. The Minnesota Vikings investigation. law enforcement. “What would wanted to wear “Jacob’s hope” hats I learned that most abductions help you find Jacob?” The police at a game. The National Football are short-term, lasting a few hours. responded, “It would have helped League said no, so the Vikings Most of the time, it is not a stranger to know who was in the area at the waited for a home game and then who victimizes a child. The way time of Jacob’s abduction.” We they all wore their hats on the Jacob was taken was extremely found out sex offenders were being sidelines as Jacob’s picture was rare. Most victims get tricked or sent to our region by another projected on to the Metrodome lured by someone they know. The county, and they were put in highlight screen. The effect was number one reason for kidnapping halfway houses. Our local law phenomenal. People joined hands is for sexual purposes. We truly enforcement did not know these for Jacob. The line stretched for 5 have to stop the child molester if halfway houses were for sex miles. The sheriff’s department told we are going to stop kidnappings. offenders. When police went to me the line would have been I want to read the profile of the find out who was living in the longer, but this happened in person who may have abducted halfway houses when Jacob was Minnesota in the winter. People Jacob, because I think it is key. taken, they were told, “We’re not were huddled together, shivering Consider how this profile might be going to tell you. There are privacy with cold, in many places. This relevant to community notification issues to consider.” You could find huge outpouring of support is still and sex offender registration. It out who was staying at the Holiday heartening to me. reads, “The following is a profile of Inn or Super 8 motels. Information We still have no suspect. We persons who have committed on noncriminals was available, but have no proof that Jacob is not crimes similar to the abduction of not information on sex offenders. alive. Jacob Wetterling. Agents assigned Well, police got the information I remember a sense of to the FBI Academy’s Behavioral they were looking for, and then the helplessness in the beginning. I Science Unit at the National Center law was corrected because it did remember crawling into bed, for the Analysis of Violent Crime not make sense. A lot of the things pulling the covers over my head compiled the profile. Construction did not make sense at the time. and thinking, “I can’t do this. It’s of a criminal personality profile is There was a man arrested for too hard.” I had this image of Jacob predicated upon careful and in St. Cloud a year and a laying somewhere pulling covers objective analysis of victimology half after Jacob’s abduction. When over his head and thinking, “ I can’t and crime-scene data coupled with police ran a criminal history check do this. They’re never going to find behavioral possibilities arising on him, they found he had me.” from study and extensive research victimized young boys in his past. At that point, we made a very in similar cases. He lived closer to the abduction site conscious decision that we were “The offender is likely to be a than we do, but police did not know going to do something about this white male between the ages of 25 about this person at the time. It issue. I began asking questions. I to 35 years old; very low self- would really help law enforcement was lucky enough to be a stay-at- image; likely to have committed a to know. Just knowing who is in home mom. I knew a lot about similar crime in the past; may have the area is a good tool. childhood things, but I knew some physical deformity; and is This information can also be nothing about child abduction, so I likely to have had a recent stressful used to clear suspects right away,

Page 4 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries rather than searching for them for had a history of victimizing little “stranger” who is moving into their years, finding out they were not girls in South Dakota admitted to community. We are denying that involved and then having to go kidnapping and murdering Jeanna stranger the opportunity to befriend back to the beginning. I was in North Dakota. He has not been children so he cannot victimize appointed to a governor’s task charged with the crime even though them. It is so important to force in Minnesota to look at this he provided a full confession. He is remember the intent of this bill. I problem and to suggest solutions. serving 30 years in prison for feel we worked really hard in We did not jump into legislation victimizing two other little girls. I Minnesota so our intent was clear. right away. I did not have the continually hear from these parents. Our intent is to have fewer victims. knowledge at the time, and I would If only we had known. We want to prevent sex offenders encourage you to avoid reactionary That statement implies that released from prison from violating legislation because it is not the best increased knowledge will lead to other children. way to proceed. It is not well change. When you are out alerting We are not going to make it easy planned. the public that a sex offender is for them to have innocent victims Eventually, we came up with a going to be released into the because people are going to know proposal to have sex offender community, anticipate change. That their style. They are going to know registration in Minnesota. I was is why you are spreading the what these people have done in the appointed by a governor who lost information, so people can respond past. Another question you need to his next election. When we went to differently and protect their ask is, “Who is good at talking to report our findings, we had to children. Not knowing is a greater communities to calm them down?” report to a new governor. We said risk. People are going to be angry. They we wanted to have sex offender How you release the information are going to ask a lot of questions. registration. He looked me straight is critical. The media like to There is a lot of concern because in the eye and said, “You can’t do highlight cases where notification sex offender registries are unfunded that. These people have rights.” did not work or where somebody mandates. The Minnesota registry That was the wrong thing to say was harassed. They do not want to is unfunded as well. The to me at the time. We got our report on all the instances when Minneapolis Police Department legislation. We proceeded in notification worked. When letting decided that if it was going to have Minnesota very carefully. We are people know that a sex offender is to notify the people, it was going to not trying to violate anyone’s being released into their do it right. Before police began the rights. We tried to give police some community, we must tell them how notification process, they held tools we felt that they could use. they should respond. We are giving community meetings and met with After we got sex offender them the information so they can people in every single precinct in registration legislation passed in take precautions. The media also the city. They educated the Minnesota, we went for Federal like to play around with the word community. These people are legislation. In 1996, Attorney “stranger.” We know stranger is a living among us now, the police General Janet Reno signed a ridiculous word. I hear law said. You are only going to be told proclamation to develop a system enforcement using it all the time, about a few individuals, but here is to connect all 50 State sex offender but people do not know who a some basic knowledge to stay safe. registries. Whether it is working or stranger is. What is a stranger? The police did that with no not, I think it is a good idea. Kids do not know. One time, I was additional funding. We had smaller At the signing of the crime bill talking to a group of social workers departments saying, “We cannot after our Federal legislation passed, and a little 5-year-old girl said, afford to do this.” Minneapolis we met Megan Kanka’s parents. “Mommy, Jacob was abducted by a was not given extra money to do it. Megan, as you know, was stranger, wasn’t he?” I was The police just decided they were kidnapped and murdered by impressed; 5 years old. The girl’s going to do it, they were going to someone who had committed these mommy said, “Yes, he was.” The do it right, and they were going to types of crimes before. This was little girl said, “I’m so glad we do a good job, and they have. not the first set of parents I met don’t know any strangers.” The Atlanta Journal- whose children were victims of Brilliant thought — once you know Constitution just ran an in-depth crime. them, they are not strangers series on sexual predators titled Jeanna North, who was anymore. “Why Megan’s Law is Not kidnapped, still has not been found. Sex offenders victimize children Enough.” We hear a lot about what A man who was living on the by gaining their trust. We are not is wrong with notification laws. corner where she was last seen who just telling kids to beware of the They are a start. They are tools that

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 5 are only as good as those who use those already living in the 99 people with just an interest. It them. I know many people have community. When notification will take all of us to build a world been arrested in Minnesota simply meetings are held in Minnesota, the worthy of our children. for not registering as sex offenders. community hears about general I want to thank you for taking They are back in jail. That is a safety for 30 minutes and then 5 the time to work on this problem good step. minutes are devoted to the specific together. I want to thank the We set up a model policy task person being released. I think that Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. force through our Police Officers is important, because the law does Department of Justice, and Standards and Training Board, and not cover areas that people need to SEARCH, The National I was really intrigued by the be aware of. Consortium for Justice Information process. When Jacob was first A lot depends on attitude. and Statistics, and everybody who kidnapped, I assumed the whole Attitude is everything in terms of organized this conference. It is very world was working together to try how you go after these people. Our exciting. You have a chance to see and find him. Boy, was I wrong. intent is to have fewer victims. We what is working in our Agencies do not always cooperate. want to prevent these people from communities so you can fight to The sheriff’s department was not harming other children. have it in your community. Find necessarily used to working with We need to educate. We do not out how we can make registries the BCA and FBI. All of this was want kids walking around scared. work and what needs to change. foreign to them, but they did a good We want them to walk around We know kids are getting job. They pulled together. smart. We get phone calls and smarter. We know communities are When I sat through this task letters from parents whose kids getting smarter. We do have the force for model policy, I learned escaped from attempted abductions right to go after those who violate that turf battles happen everywhere. because they knew what to do. We our kids. I cannot ever address a Law enforcement sometimes are trying for fewer victims. I do group of children without talking blames the Department of not want to see another family live about hope. The NCMEC has given Corrections, and the Department of through what our family has gone us information on many cases Corrections blames the or through. involving children who come home officers, and they think the We need cooperation. There are after long periods of time. Most of treatment people are at fault, and other agencies within your those come home because of law what about social services? It is communities. There are sexual enforcement, but not always. easy to throw blame around. You assault centers with speakers Everyday citizens who are aware of should think about this the next available. Use resources that are those who victimize children call time you find yourself saying, “We there. Call the National Center for the police. are doing our job, but they are not.” Missing and Exploited Children We need to know that all the You could call a victim’s (NCMEC) (1-800-THE-LOST). It pieces are in place for our children parents and explain to them why can provide an overview of this to come home. We can never give the investigation is not working and issue that none of us are going to up. I know of a man from see what you can do to make it get individually. There are also Minnesota who was reunited with better. See what you can do to nonprofits that work for missing his family after 26 years. I hope it improve communication between children. does not take us that long to find agencies. Maybe another visit to We formed a professional Jacob. I would like you to the legislature is necessary to make organization called the Association personalize these 2 days and take the notification law more efficient. of Missing and Exploited your work to heart. Never give up, Education does not happen just Children’s Organizations and never forget about our missing with people in your community. I (AMECO). These are organizations kids. had to educate our governor as to that help find missing children and I would like to end with a verse why we were going to do this. We help law enforcement, and they will that was given to me by one of are constantly educating legislators also help you get legislation passed. Jacob’s classmates. It was written 5 so they know what we need. They have speakers and they go years after Jacob was abducted. It Since most sex offenders are not after those who victimize children. is called “Ode to Jacob.” in prison, the people in the You may know about Morgan My song is twice as loud now community need to know what they Nick, who was kidnapped in Alma, because I have to sing for the are supposed to be watching out for Arkansas. Morgan’s mother, my both of us. I sing of the joy, — not just for one offender who is friend Colleen Nick, often says that pain, and growth I’m living, going to be released but for all one person with a vision is worth and for your life, a life I hope

Page 6 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries has song. I hope the man who forgot what innocence is allows you to sing, even if it’s in your heart. I hope one day the song we all sing together will reach his ears, because that’ll be the day you can join us and sing the harmony. I want to thank all of you for the work you do every day. I do not know if you are aware of the impact it has on our lives. When we need you, you are there and you have something in place to help us. I want to extend an offer to help you if you need me in any way to make registry laws more effective so we can protect our kids. I would like to do that for you. Thank you. I hope you have a very successful conference.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 7 Sex offenders and offending: Learning more from national data collection programs

DR. JAN M. CHAIKEN Director, Bureau of Justice Statistics U.S. Department of Justice

National sex offender registries which is complete, accurate, timely victims by providing detailed are the outgrowth of increased and, most importantly, which can information about who the victims technical capability and evolving be shared across jurisdictions. are, how many offenders they faced public awareness of the new uses What is known about an offender in in an incident, if they have any that can be made of offender one place will soon be instantly relationship to those who offended information recorded at each step known in other places where that against them, and the consequences in the criminal justice system. The offender may travel or settle. of the crime to them in lost public safety interest in this Together, these two developing property and injuries suffered. information and evolving public national efforts pave the way Incident data are critical to our demand for greater knowledge toward a more sophisticated knowledge of violent sex crimes about criminal justice system understanding of the many varieties where the victim can be of either operations reaffirm the importance of sex offenders and sex offending. sex, where the age of the victim can of good criminal history record Handgun crimes, domestic be known, where a relationship information and the benefit of violence, hate crimes and violent between victim and offender, if statistically measuring the sex offenses have been the any, can be described, where the government’s response to crime. principal stimuli for improving our type of sex offense can be These two issues are fundamental data on crime and offenders. These characterized, and where victim concerns of the Bureau of Justice improvements, however, will injuries can be catalogued. It is the Statistics (BJS). impact all types of crimes and diary of the violent sex offense Understanding sex offending victims, and we will know a great victim’s experience as recorded by and its consequences require good deal more about those who commit a police officer. record keeping on both offenders crime. In many ways, NIBRS will and victims. This means the At BJS, we view NIBRS in this expand information about violent development of a continuing historical context of crime statistics sex crimes similar to the way the partnership among the various development: How do we get Supplementary Homicide Reports government components closer to measuring and describing (SHR) expand our knowledge and responsible for responding to sex the actual crime phenomenon understanding of murder and non- offenders and sex-offense victims itself? NIBRS data permit the negligent manslaughter. For and for measuring how well we are collection of comparable example, the SHR allows us to addressing this very fundamental information across jurisdictions examine in great detail murders public concern. about the crime, the victim, the that arise from rapes or sexual offender and the environment in assaults. NIBRS Ð The next generation which their interaction occurs. of crime information NIBRS also captures the Detailed knowledge on Today BJS, the FBI and uniqueness of the crime problem in sexual assault murders SEARCH are working toward each participating . An estimated 427,000 murders nationwide implementation of the Rather than a narrow group of 8 occurred in the National Incident-Based Reporting Index offenses meant to between 1976 and 1995. System (NIBRS), a statistical and approximate what is happening Circumstances surrounding the records management system that with crime, NIBRS collects murder were known in about takes us to the next generation of information on 57 types of crimes 333,000 of these murders, or in information about crime and — 46 Group A crimes and 11 about 8 out of 10. In those murders offending. Today, we are also Group B crimes. For the first time where the details of the crime were talking about the improvement of a ever in law enforcement statistics, known, about 4,900 murders, or criminal records infrastructure NIBRS provides a forum for crime approximately 1 in 68 murders,

Page 8 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries involved a rape or other violent sex as all murders to involve victims thirds of all offenders serving time offense. In 1995, murders involving and offenders who were strangers: in State prisons for rape or sexual rape and other sex offenses 39 percent of sexual assault assault had a victim under age 18. accounted for about 0.8 percent of murders and 21 percent of all Since there are an estimated all murders with known murders involved victims and 95,000 sex offenders in State circumstances. That is about the offenders who had no prior prisons today, well over 60,000 same percentage as in 1993 and relationship. most likely committed their violent 1994, but well below the peak of sex crime against a child under age 1.9 percent of all murders More data sought on 18. This finding is consistent with established in the latter part of the sexual assaults of children BJS data on rape from 12 States — 1970s. Except for the aggregate counts which did not include sexual About 95 percent of the of forcible rape of a female victim assault and was limited to female offenders in sexual assault murders from Uniform Crime Reporting victims — that showed more than were male, compared to 87 percent (UCR) statistics, little is known half the victims were under 18. of the offenders in all other types of from current law enforcement data What is even more shocking is murder. About 6 in 10 sexual about the factors associated with that for the majority of these assault murderers were white, recorded crimes involving rape or prisoners serving time for violent while less than half of the offenders attempted rape. The goal of NIBRS sex crimes against children, their in all murders were white. Sexual is to extract more useful data from victims were age 12 and under. assault murderers were, on average, information collected at a crime This really makes the case as to 5 years younger than all murderers scene so we can maximize the use why this type of information needs — 26 years old for sexual assault of that information. With the to be collected at the incident level. murderers compared to 31 years advent of NIBRS, the kinds of BJS repeatedly emphasizes that old for all murderers. Half were age information about crime previously there are few things more important 24 or younger. available only for murder and non- for police departments to record Knives were the most negligent manslaughter can now be about crime than basic information commonly used weapons in sexual used in the analysis of other crimes, on the victimization of children, assault murders, accounting for 29 particularly violent crimes. especially young children. percent of the murders. Firearms A police chief interested in were used in 17 percent of sexual learning whether more sexual Examining NIBRS assault murders; blunt objects were assaults against children were data on rape used in 13 percent; hands and feet occurring in his or her jurisdiction In order to give a clear example were used in 20 percent; and other could easily focus attention on of the utility of NIBRS data for methods, such as asphyxiation or those rapes and sexual assaults — improving our understanding of poisoning, accounted for about 22 regardless of the victims’ sex — violent sex offenses, I will review percent. where the victim was under age 18. some of the interesting findings About 82 percent of sexual The chief could then compare the obtained from the first batch of assault murder victims were rates of occurrence, taking into NIBRS data submitted to the FBI. female. This is quite a large account the number of age-eligible (BJS received data tapes for percentage when you consider that, youth in the population, to other calendar year 1991 from the first 3 in all murders, 24 percent of the NIBRS jurisdictions. participating States — Alabama, victims were female. About two- Mr. Lawrence Greenfeld, North Dakota and South Carolina. thirds of sexual assault murder principal deputy director of BJS, These 3 States account for about victims were white, while about recently conducted a study of 3.3 percent of the U.S. population. half of all murder victims are imprisoned offenders whose BJS staff decided to focus its first white. Victims averaged about 32 victims were children under age 18. data analysis on rapes. These 3 years of age, and about 1 in 4 were Utilizing BJS’s National Survey of States account for 3.4 percent of under the age of 18. Inmates in State Correctional rapes reported nationwide.) In fact, among murder victims Facilities, a self-report survey About 10 percent of the rapes in age 13 to 17, rape or sexual assault conducted among nearly 14,000 the 3 States did not conform to the occurred in more than 3 percent of State prisoners every 5 years, he UCR definition of forcible rape for the cases; this is higher than the learned something from these three reasons: percentage found among any other incarcerated sex offenders that, to • in 8.7 percent of the rapes, the victim age group. Sexual assault our knowledge, had never been victims were male; murders were about twice as likely reported anywhere before. Two-

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 9 • in 0.8 percent, both the victim family rapes occurred in a in 10 rapes involving a knife and offender were female; or residence. The 3 States collectively resulted in injury to the victim. • in 0.2 percent, the victim was averaged 8 rapes a day, ranging As these examples show, male and the offender was from 11 per day on Saturdays to 6 NIBRS fills in the details about female. per day on Wednesdays. Nearly crime which help law enforcement Rape victims were about evenly one-third of the rapes took place planners target the most common divided between whites and blacks. between midnight and 4 a.m. and characteristics of crime and In about 88 percent of forcible there was little variation in time of consider prevention strategies rapes, the victim and offender were day by the victim/offender based upon firm knowledge about of the same race. About 80 percent relationship or by the location crime. Questions about whether of the rape victims were under the where the rape occurred. The violent sex crimes are increasing or age of 30, and about half of these largest percentage of rapes whether such crimes involving were under the age of 18. Victims occurred during the 12-hour block children are declining in Bellevue younger than 12 years of age between 8 p.m. Friday and 8 a.m. or Seattle or in any of the other accounted for 15 percent of those Saturday. 9,000 cities and 3,000 counties in raped, and another 29 percent of Five percent of the rapes the United States are difficult to rape victims were between the ages involved the use of a gun, 7 percent answer at both the local or national of 12 and 17. Among the youngest involved a knife, and 80 percent level other than by mostly victims of rape — those less than involved the use of physical force anecdotal or impressionistic 12 years old — the victim knew the only. Rape by a stranger involved . offender nearly 90 percent of the the use of a gun 10 percent of the NIBRS provides a framework time. time, about 5 times as likely as for systematically documenting and According to law enforcement family rapes (2 percent). About 8 analyzing patterns of violent sexual agencies reporting these data, 43 percent of rapes committed by ex- assault crime and offending in a percent of these young victims spouses involved the use of a gun local community, for comparing were assaulted by family members, and another 12 percent involved the that community to contiguous or almost 4 times the proportion found use of a knife. comparable communities anywhere among victims age 30 or older (11 Fourteen percent of rapes in the United States, and for percent). Older victims (age 30 or involving black offenders and black comparing one’s own community older) were about 12 times as likely victims involved the use of a gun, to the Nation as a whole. as the youngest victims (less than about twice the percentage of age 12) to have been raped by a white-on-white rapes (7 percent). Criminal history records stranger (36 percent versus 3 Interracial rapes, black-on-white or show picture of sex offenders percent). white-on-black, were equally likely Criminal history records are the Among victims age 18 to 29 — to involve use of a gun or knife (22 best formal portraits for examining the largest age group of rape percent compared to 21 percent). the lives of those who commit victims — about two-thirds had a Rapes occurring in or near a violent sexual assaults. In 1995, prior relationship with the rapist, roadway or alley were the most there were about 130,000 arrests but the rapists were 7 times as likely locations where the offender for rape and other sex offenses. likely to have been acquaintances used a gun (13 percent). These arrests should have resulted as opposed to family members (57 About 40 percent of rape victims in entries to criminal history percent versus 8 percent). Just over suffered a collateral injury, with 5 records, since the vast majority of 40 percent of the rapists were age percent suffering a major injury those arrested for violent sex 30 or older, about twice the such as severe lacerations, crimes were adults: 84 percent of percentage of victims of this age fractures, internal injuries or those arrested for rape and 83 group (41 percent versus 20 unconsciousness. More than half of percent of those arrested for other percent). About 1 in 8 rapists was a spousal rapes, rapes by ex-spouses sex offenses were age 18 or older. juvenile offender (under age 18). In and stranger rapes resulted in injury The number of persons in prison 9 out of 10 rapes where the to the victim, while about one- for sexual assault offenses other offender was under age 18, the quarter of parent-child rapes than rape is growing rapidly since victim was under age 18 as well. resulted in major injury. Injuries 1980, second only to drug offenses. Just over 60 percent of the rapes were most common among victims It increased 15 percent per year, took place in a residence. About 1 age 30 or older and in rapes where compared to an overall average of 7 in 3 rapes by a stranger took place the offender used a knife. Nearly 6 percent per year for drug offenses. in a residence, while 9 of every 10

Page 10 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries The criminal history record can criminal behavior and convictions determining the substance of the play an important role at each stage but also on conformity with prior sentence they impose. in the case processing of those pretrial release conditions, would For many offenders, few other arrested for violent sex crimes. One be a critical factor in determining entries appear on the criminal of the most critical case decisions whether or not a should history record following occurs shortly after arrest when be released. sentencing. Based on a 1995 survey conditions for pretrial release are BJS data reveal that about two- of State criminal history records established by the court. BJS data thirds of convicted rape repositories, it is clear that local from large urban counties indicate receive a prison sentence, 19 jails and probation and parole that just over 1 percent of felony percent receive a jail term and 13 agencies rarely provide details on filings are for rape. percent receive probation following the dates of entry to or exit from About one-half of felony rape . A prison sentence for custody or supervision and the defendants are released from convicted rapists depends heavily manner in which supervision is detention prior to the disposition of on how their cases were terminated. Prisons are a bit better their case. Only about 3 percent of adjudicated. Sixty-three percent of because they often fingerprint rape defendants have no set those who pleaded guilty were sent offenders at admission and release and are not considered eligible for to prison, while 89 percent of those to ensure the prisoner’s identity. release. About two-thirds of rape convicted by a jury received a Such fingerprint cards may then be defendants have additional charges prison sentence. When a jury sent to a State Identification Bureau besides the charge of rape. For decided , the average prison that enters the information on the most, the additional charges are term was twice as long as the term state rap sheet. also . About one-half of imposed following a plea, a An obvious key element of a those released prior to adjudication difference of 13 years. criminal history record should be by the court obtained release by Research has consistently shown the status and movement non-financial means, such as that the gravity of the offense, information relative to convictions release on recognizance. combined with the extensiveness received. Such information is About one-half of the rape and seriousness of the criminal especially critical for those who defendants in the BJS sample from record, are key factors in the must make decisions regarding sex large urban counties had a prior sentencing decision. There is little offenders in the community. history of arrests, with the vast specific knowledge, however, Information about those offenders majority of those arrests having about the extent to which criminal with prior records of unsuccessful been for felony offenses. About history information is used or the community supervision would be one-quarter of rape defendants had specific weight given to an of enormous value in completing at least five prior arrest charges. In individual’s criminal record by presentence investigations and fact, an estimated 27 percent of prosecutors, judges or juries in rape determining dischargeability, level these rape defendants had a cases. BJS data on felony case of supervision or risk to the public. criminal justice status, such as processing indicate a 20- Recidivism is the best available probation or pretrial release, at the percentage-point difference for measure of the public safety time of the rape arrest. Most rape violent offenders in the likelihood consequences of sentences, whether defendants with a prior arrest of receiving prison if they have a it is failure following history also had a history of prior conviction history. or failure following a sentence to convictions. About one in eight About one in five violent sex community supervision. By rape defendants had a prior offenders in prison had been on definition, recidivism must be an conviction history that included probation or parole at the time of outcome that is determinable from violent felonies. the new offense for which they a criminal history record. Among rapists who gained were incarcerated. In order to play BJS’s most recent recidivism pretrial release, about one in five a significant role in the sentencing study tracked a sample of prison violated the conditions of that decision, such records of justice releases representing 109,000 release by failing to appear in system handling should necessarily offenders discharged from prisons court, by being arrested for a new be complete and accurate and in 11 states in 1983. crime or by violating some other should provide the capacity to Rap sheets revealed more than condition of release. Clearly, an identify those with prior histories 19,000 prior arrests for rape and accurate and current criminal of violence and sexual assault. sexual assault preceding the most history record, which incorporates There is no doubt that courts will recent imprisonment and 4,000 information not only on prior rely upon that record for arrests for rape or sexual assault in

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 11 the 3 years following release in NCHIP will allow us to look at 1983. arrest transactions in States other Offenders convicted of rape or than the State in which the offender sexual assault accounted for just was released. This was something over 4 percent of those released that caused great difficulty for us in from prisons in the study States in the last study. Most importantly, 1983. Over the 3-year period the timeliness of arrest reporting following release, about one-half of and greater completeness of both rapists and sexual assaulters disposition reporting will provide were re-arrested for a new crime, records that bear little or no more than one-third were re- resemblance to the records we used convicted, and more than one- in the last study, where disposition quarter were re-imprisoned within information was missing more the 3-year follow-up. An estimated often than not. 28 percent of released rapists had a Progress in the battle against sex new arrest for violence and 8 offending and sex offenders is percent were re-arrested for rape. A dependent upon improved similar BJS 3-year study of felony knowledge about the crimes and probationers nationwide found that the offenders — goals common to 20 percent of rapists were re- both NIBRS and NCHIP. NIBRS, arrested within 3 years and 3 the crime statistics model for now percent were re-arrested for a new and the future, will forge a greater rape. partnership between crime and justice data at the local and national Follow-up study of levels. Such data will provide more discharged prisoners information and descriptions of the BJS is now initiating the largest context of crime, which are follow-up study of discharged essential for policy development prisoners ever undertaken, with the and funding support at the Federal joint support of FBI CODIS staff level. and the Corrections Program Office The kinds of questions being in the Office of Justice Programs, posed to all levels of government U.S. Department of Justice. Plans by our citizens about violent sex call for tracking self-representing offenses and offenders can only be samples of releasees from 12 to 15 answered by data which sensitively States and undertaking follow-up of describe the conditions under every single sex offender released which victims and offenders in those States. When we complete interact, the basic reason for this effort, we expect to have about NIBRS. It is moving us that much 10,000 offenders convicted of rape closer to the actual description of or sexual assault who were the criminal incident, the place discharged in 1994 and followed where our understanding of crime through criminal history records for is least likely to be distorted by 3 years. If follow-on funds are other factors. The FBI and BJS are obtained, we may continue to track committed to ensuring that all these offenders. jurisdictions have the most useful This is a very opportune time for information on how victims and this kind of study because of the offenders come together and the many improvements that occurred consequences of these contacts. We in criminal history records since believe NIBRS holds the promise our last study. The National for this kind of information Criminal History Improvement opportunity. Program (NCHIP) created automated records where we had only manual records before.

Page 12 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Federal panel: Wetterling Act/Megan’s Law compliance issues

Panel introduction Marlene Beckman The trilogy of Federal statutes Lisa Gursky Sorkin Justice Department guideline changes and clarifications Donna Feinberg Applying for a compliance deadline extension James C. Swain Panel question-and-answer session Federal panel members Panel introduction

MARLENE BECKMAN Special Counsel, Office of Justice Programs U.S. Department of Justice

Good afternoon. Today, this Since enactment of these laws in address the issues surrounding panel is going to bring you the 1994 and 1996, we have come a Federal compliance. news — the good news and the not- long way toward establishing a The first speaker, Lisa Gursky so-good-but-getting-better news. coordinated approach among local, Sorkin, will speak briefly about the The good news is the progress State and Federal governments to three statutes and their we have made in State address the challenge of making interrelationship. She will also talk establishment of sex offender our communities safer from sex about the development of the registration and notification offenders. Prior to the enactment of Department of Justice’s guidelines programs. In summary, the Jacob the Jacob Wetterling Act, 39 States for the Wetterling Act and Megan’s Wetterling Act, Megan’s Law and had some form of sex offender Law. The second speaker, Donna the Pam Lychner Act,1 taken registration. Today, all 50 States Feinberg, will speak more together, require States to develop have sex offender registration specifically about the Federal registration systems for convicted systems in place. Prior to the registration requirements. She will child molesters and other sex enactment of Megan’s Law, six also address the basis on which offenders, require States to release community notification laws had States will be considered for a 2- to the public relevant information been enacted. Following the year “good-faith-efforts” extension about registered offenders when passage of Megan’s Law, there was of the statutory deadline for necessary to protect the public, and a period of intense activity with 21 compliance. require the U.S. Department of States passing notification The third speaker, James C. Justice to build and maintain a legislation. Today, 45 States have Swain, will talk about the policies database to track registered passed legislation that either and procedures for the States’ offenders nationwide. authorizes community notification submissions of their registration or allows individuals or agencies and compliance programs and their outside the criminal justice realm to requests for extensions of the access sex offender registration deadline to the Bureau of Justice information. That is the good news. Assistance. The not-so-good-but-getting- Each speaker will be allotted better news is that the majority of approximately 10 minutes, which States do not yet meet all of the will leave us time for questions. Federal requirements of the We feel this provides a very Wetterling Act and Megan’s Law. important opportunity for us to hear They are in danger of losing 10 from you. 1 In order to comply with the Jacob percent of their Byrne Program Wetterling Crimes Against Children money as a result.2 This panel will and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act (42 U.S.C. ¤ 14071), States must register child molesters and 2 Editor’s Note: The Edward Byrne sexually violent offenders residing in Memorial State and Local Law their States. Megan’s Law (104 P.L. Enforcement Assistance Program, certain crimes against minors and 145, 100 Stat. 1345) requires release of administered by the Bureau of Justice sexually violent offenses and must relevant information to protect the Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice, establish a more stringent set of public from child molesters and provides formula grants to States to registration requirements for highly sexually violent offenders. The Pam improve the functioning of the criminal dangerous sex offenders, characterized Lychner Sexual Offender Tracking and justice system, with emphasis on as “sexually violent predators.” If a Identification Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. ¤ violent crime and serious offenders. State fails to comply with the 14072) amends certain Wetterling Act Under the Wetterling Act, States must Wetterling Act, 10 percent of the requirements and creates establish a 10-year registration State’s Byrne formula grant may be responsibilities for the FBI. requirement for persons convicted of withheld.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 15 The trilogy of Federal statutes

LISA GURSKY SORKIN Chief of Staff, Office of Policy Development U.S. Department of Justice

Good afternoon. I am going to programs. The States’ obligations find registry information. The provide a brief overview of the under the Wetterling Act fall Wetterling Act requires this. Federal laws intended to guide roughly into four categories, which We also want to ensure clear States in developing their sex I will describe in brief. lines of communication between offender registration and First, States must require certain local and State law enforcement. notification programs. A trilogy of offenders to register. Convicted The Wetterling Act contains a statutes now exists that defines child molesters and other sexually number of provisions to help Federal policy concerning violent offenders must register and ensure that these folks are working registration and notification for provide law enforcement with together during an investigation or convicted child molesters and other current addresses for 10 years. just conferring about the movement sexually violent offenders. Sexually violent predators, the of sex offenders in general. This We recognize that there is some most dangerous subclass of also applies to communication confusion about the way these laws offenders, must provide the State between States. Under the fit together, how they work with more extensive registration Wetterling Act, if an offender tells together and what they mean for information. They must continue to the State he is moving to a new the States. I want to shed some register until they are found to no State, the old State needs to tell the light on these questions, and also longer be sexually violent new State that this offender is on talk about the written guidelines the predators. The Wetterling Act his way. The Wetterling Act U.S. Department of Justice contains standards and procedures encourages open lines of produced to help States comply for States to follow to determine communication between different with the Federal laws. who is and who is no longer a levels of law enforcement, both sexually violent predator. within and among States. That is a Wetterling Act Second, States need to ensure very important policy goal. The first of this trilogy of that they maintain accurate Fourth, States must disclose statutes is the Jacob Wetterling registries. What good are registries information to the public when Crimes Against Children and if they include offenders with stale, necessary for public safety. I will Sexually Violent Offender old addresses? The Wetterling Act discuss this requirement shortly in Registration Act, which was provides procedures for States to connection with the Federal enacted as part of President follow to conduct proactive, Megan’s Law. Clinton’s 1994 Crime Act.1 It periodic address verification. States I want to emphasize that States requires States to establish effective need to verify addresses annually do not need to change their laws or registration systems for convicted for most offenders, and quarterly or statutes to comply with the child molesters and other sexually every 90 days for sexually violent Wetterling Act. The Wetterling Act violent offenders. It also requires predators. only requires each State to have a the establishment of a more Third, States must maintain and conforming registration program. stringent set of registration distribute registry information to States can accomplish this by requirements for a subclass of the law enforcement. This requirement statute if they want, but they can most highly dangerous offenders, has several facets. States must also use regulations, administrative who are designated under the Act ensure that registry information is practices or policies to comply. as “sexually violent predators.” contained at a central State The Wetterling Act gives States The Wetterling Act provides a repository. We do not want registry until September 13, 1997, to set of minimum national standards information scattered throughout establish conforming registration for the States to follow in numerous counties or cities. When programs. This is 3 years from the developing conforming registration police conduct an investigation, date of enactment. The Attorney they need to know where they can General can extend this deadline by 1 42 U.S.C. ¤ 14071. 2 years for States making good-

Page 16 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries faith efforts to comply. States Pam Lychner Act To put this in perspective, States unable to adopt conforming The third law in the Federal need to comply with the Wetterling registration programs by September trilogy is the Pam Lychner Sexual Act as originally enacted, plus 1997 will lose 10 percent of their Offender Tracking and Megan’s Law, by September 1997. Byrne Formula Grant funding. Identification Act of 1996, enacted Lychner Act requirements take in October 1996.3 The Lychner Act effect 2 years later. The Megan’s Law imposes a number of obligations on enforcement provisions under the The second in the trilogy of Federal, State and local Lychner Act amendments to the Federal laws is Megan’s Law, governments to enhance public Wetterling Act are the same as for enacted in May 1996.2 (Numerous safety. The Lychner Act has three the rest of the Wetterling Act. A 2- States have enacted their own principal requirements: year, good-faith extension is versions of Megan’s Law, named • First, it obligates the Attorney available, and 10 percent of the after 7-year-old murder victim General to establish a national State’s Byrne Formula Grant Megan Kanka.) The Federal law database at the FBI to track the money is at stake. amended the community whereabouts and movements The second general requirement notification provisions of the of convicted sex offenders. for the States under the Lychner Wetterling Act. Originally, the • Second, the Act requires the Act is enhanced communication Wetterling Act allowed States to FBI to handle sex offender with the FBI about convicted sex release information to the public if registration in States lacking a offenders. The Lychner Act they felt it was warranted, but minimally sufficient sex imposes a number of freestanding release of information was not offender registration program. requirements on the States that are required. The term “minimally not part of the Wetterling Act. Megan’s Law requires States to sufficient” is defined in the These requirements are designed to release registration information to Lychner Act. facilitate the FBI’s role in sex the public when it is necessary for • Third, the Lychner Act amends offender registration. The FBI public safety. This requirement is the Wetterling Act to prescribe needs to have the most accurate and often referred to as “mandatory more stringent registration up-to-date information to maintain community notification.” The requirements. For example, a national database that works. The compliance deadline for Megan’s under the Wetterling Act, as source of that information is the Law is the same as for the originally enacted, most States. Wetterling Act. States need to have offenders needed to register The Lychner Act thus imposes a conforming notification programs with the State for 10 years. number of requirements to make by September 1997. The Attorney Under the Lychner Act, a sure States are communicating with General can also extend this number of offenders will need the FBI about sex offenders living deadline by 2 years on the basis of to register for life. These in their jurisdictions. These a State’s good-faith efforts. States include aggravated offenders requirements take effect 1 year that fail to implement a conforming and recidivists, along with from the date of enactment of the system will lose 10 percent of their sexually violent predators. Lychner Act, or by October 1997. Byrne Grant funds. (This is not an The Lychner Act establishes two additional 10 percent added on to basic requirements for the States. Justice Department 10 percent for noncompliance with First, the extent that the Lychner guidelines the Wetterling Act; Megan’s Law Act amends the Wetterling Act, the This has been a brief overview is part of the overall Wetterling States will need to make sure that of Federal sex offender registration scheme and is treated the same their registration programs enacted and notification laws. I want very way.) under the Wetterling Act meet the briefly to address the Justice new Lychner Act requirements. Department’s guidelines for these Lifetime registration is one statutes, which have generated example of a new State almost as much confusion as the requirement. The Lychner Act statutes themselves. Both seem to gives States 3 years from the date change with frequency. of enactment, or until October In April 1996, the Justice 1999, to implement its provisions. Department published final guidelines for implementation of the Wetterling Act. These guidelines described the Act’s 2 Pub. L. 104-145, 100 Stat. 1345. 3 42 U.S.C. ¤ 14072.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 17 various requirements. They were intended to help the States develop conforming registration systems. Exactly 1 year after the final guidelines were published, we took the next logical step and published proposed guidelines. These were published on April 4, 1997.4 We did this for two reasons: Number one, we had not previously provided guidance for Megan’s Law because it was enacted after we had published the final Wetterling Act guidelines. We wanted to provide more information about what Megan’s Law meant. Number two, in the course of working with the States after the previous final guidelines were published, we learned that we needed to provide more guidance in a number of areas. Several interpretive questions had arisen, and we recognized that more information was needed. In this latest round of proposed guidelines, we attempted to resolve some of the interpretive questions that were raised. These proposed guidelines were published for public comment. The public comment period ended in early June 1997 and the final guidelines were published in the Federal Register in July 1997. 5

4 62 Fed. Reg. 16180 (April 4, 1997). 5 62 Fed. Reg. 39009 (July 21, 1997).

Page 18 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Justice Department guideline changes and clarifications

DONNA FEINBERG Attorney, Office of General Counsel Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice

I would like to discuss officers whose responsibilities preclude a State procedure where approaches States may take to relate to correctional matters or the the prison officer or court transmits establish sex offender registration execution of sentences. The revised the initial information indirectly to and notification programs in Wetterling Act guidelines make it the State agency by sending it first compliance with the Wetterling clear that assigning these to the local law enforcement Act. This information may be responsibilities to such officers is jurisdiction where the registrant found in the Justice Department’s permissible. will reside, assuming the local revised guidelines for the The Act provides that, if a agency is then required to forward Wetterling Act and Megan’s Law, person who is required to register is the information to the State agency. which have been published in the released from incarceration, the Procedures of this type will be Federal Register.1 responsible officer must obtain the deemed in compliance as long as Since the original Wetterling required registration information the information is submitted to the Act guidelines were published in and forward it to the registration local law enforcement agency April 1996, a majority of States agency within 3 days of receipt. within the applicable time frame — submitted enacted or proposed sex Many States do not wait until the no later than 3 days after the offender registration provisions to release date to obtain the offender’s release. The State the Justice Department for information. They require offenders procedures must also ensure that preliminary review. The review to submit the information 30 or 60 the local agency forwards the process raised a number of days prior to release. The information promptly to the State questions, which are addressed in guidelines make it clear that this registration agency. the revised guidelines. The approach is permissible as long as guideline clarifications concern the information is forwarded to the Address changes some of the following issues. appropriate agencies no later than 3 The Wetterling Act requires days after release. registrants to report address Registration procedures Once the initial registration changes to the State registration Several clarifications cover information is obtained, some agency within 10 days of moving. initial registration procedures. States require the responsible However, many State programs do When an offender is released from officer to send it to the State not require registrants to send their incarceration or placed on registration agency and to the local address changes directly to the probation or parole, the Wetterling law enforcement agency State agency. Information is Act requires courts and/or prison concurrently instead of transmitting submitted to a local law officers to follow certain the information to the State agency enforcement agency or other procedures. They must notify the only, which is then required to intermediary, such as a parole or offender of State registration forward it to the responsible local probation officer, who is required obligations, obtain registration law enforcement agency. The to forward it to the State agency. information from the offender, and guidelines make it clear that The revised Justice Department submit it to the registration agency. concurrent transmission is guidelines make clear that a Some States assign this permissible if registration registrant can submit address responsibility to probation or parole information is promptly made changes through an intermediary as available to both the State long as the registrant provides the 1 “ registration agency and the local intermediary with the new address Final Guidelines for Megan’s Law agency with jurisdiction over the information within the time frame and the Jacob Wetterling Crimes offender. specified in the Act — or no later Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act,” 62 Fed. The guidelines make clear that than 10 days after a move — and Reg. 39009 (July 21, 1997) the Wetterling Act does not State procedures ensure that the

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 19 intermediary forwards the address it would not be necessary for verification form sent to the change information promptly to the sexually violent predator registrant’s last reported address. designated State law enforcement determinations to be made by a Verification intervals are 90 agency. competent court with the assistance days rather than annually for of a board of experts prior to the sexually violent predators. Some Sexually violent predator commencement of the registration States delegate address verification A number of the guideline obligation. However, it would still functions to local law enforcement clarifications involve the sexually be necessary for a court, assisted by agencies. The revised guidelines violent predator registration a board of experts, to terminate the permit this approach to periodic requirements. The Wetterling Act heightened registration address verification as long as prescribes more stringent requirements of sexually violent procedures ensure that the State registration requirements for the predators. Moreover, even if it is registration agency is promptly subclass of offenders characterized determined that a person is no notified if, through the process, it is as “sexually violent predators.” longer a sexually violent predator, discovered that the registrant is no Some States require that sexually the guidelines make clear that this longer at the last reported address. violent predators be civilly does not relieve the person of the The revised guidelines also clarify committed as opposed to making Wetterling Act’s 10-year that States may require the them subject to more stringent registration requirement, which registrant’s personal appearance at requirements. The revised applies to any person convicted of a a local law enforcement agency to guidelines clarify that this approach criminal offense against a minor or return an address verification form is permissible. a sexually violent offense. rather than returning the form by The Wetterling Act requires that mail. the sentencing court determine Length of registration whether a person is or is no longer Another guideline clarification Notification methods a sexually violent predator. The involves the length of registration. Another guideline clarification guidelines clarify that this The Wetterling Act requires that involves the methods States may requirement only means the released convicted offenders be use to notify local jurisdictions determination must be made by a subject to registration and periodic about registration and change of court that is legally competent to address verification for at least 10 address information. institute the more stringent years. However, sexually violent After receiving registration registration requirements predators must be made to register information from the responsible prescribed for sexually violent for life unless relieved of the officer or court, the State law predators, which could be the court obligation by a competent court enforcement agency must in which the offender was determining that the offender is no immediately enter the information convicted of the underlying sex longer a sexually violent predator. into the appropriate record system offense but does not have to be. The revised guidelines make it and notify the local law Under the Wetterling Act, States clear that a State would not be in enforcement agency where the have discretion with regard to the compliance if it allows offenders’ person expects to reside. The timing of the determination of registration obligations to be Wetterling Act allows States to whether an offender is a sexually waived or terminated before the decide what method they will use violent predator. A State may end of the prescribed 10-year to notify local law enforcement decide that the predator registration period based on agencies. Permissible options determination be made at the time findings such as rehabilitation or include written notices, electronic of sentencing or as part of the that continued registration does not or telephone transmissions, and on- original sentence, but it is not serve the purposes of the State’s line access to registration required to do so. The predator registration provisions. information. determination could also be made instead by a competent court when Address verifications Extensions an offender has served his prison Other guideline clarifications States currently unable to term and is about to be released cover address verification comply with the Wetterling Act from custody. procedures. The Wetterling Act and Megan’s Law should consider Should a State choose to subject requires annual address verification submitting requests for an all persons convicted of a sexually with the designated State agency extension of the September 13, violent offense to the more for all offenders, who are required 1997, compliance deadline. stringent registration requirements, to return within 10 days an address

Page 20 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries A State should submit its most recent proposed or enacted registration and community notification program along with a letter explaining its “good-faith efforts” to comply with the Wetterling Act and requesting an extension of the statutory deadline. The letter should describe the State’s efforts to comply with the Wetterling Act, including an explanation of the concrete steps taken and the progress made since its passage in September 1994. The State should also explain why it has not been able to establish a compliant program by the deadline. In addition, the State should describe in detail its plan to establish a compliant program by the end of the extension period and submit a timetable specifying the anticipated time frame indicating when each step of its overall plan will be taken.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 21 Applying for a compliance deadline extension

JAMES C. SWAIN Director, State and Local Assistance Division Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice

As the last member of the panel, All but 14 of the 56 States and If an extension is justified, we it falls on me to sum up and to territories have now applied for a 2- will prepare a very short and review our process for handling year extension to come into full straightforward letter from Ms. Gist extension requests. Ms. Nancy compliance with the Wetterling to you indicating approval of a 2- Gist’s June 18, 1997, letter outlines Act. We have been able to contact year extension for your State. After what the States must do to meet the most States to point out the kinds you receive that extension, we want good-faith extension of problems meeting the criterion to work with you intensively to requirements.1 set out in Ms. Gist’s letter that we bring your State into full Today’s speakers have made are finding in the extension request compliance with the Wetterling every effort to be helpful and letters already submitted. Act. Technical assistance will be responsive. Both Lisa Gursky We will review each extension made available to you. We are Sorkin and Donna Feinberg spoke request, and then the staff at the going to try to be very helpful. not only about the registration and Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) Every time I think about the notification legislation, but also will contact you to provide States and the Federal government about the guideline changes made assistance. That is the first step. working together, a number of in response to some of the concerns In reviewing the extension stories come to mind about how the raised about issues such as local request letters you plan to submit, Federal government is helpful to versus State reporting please consider the following: you as your partner. Former U.S. requirements. • Does your letter include a copy Supreme Court Justice Tom C. Additionally, this panel was of your State’s proposed or Clark used to tell an old story that I scheduled in response to your present legislation or think is appropriate. requests for hands-on assistance regulation or does it refer to a It seems there were these with the very difficult matter of the document that was already fellows who would travel to a September 13, 1997, Wetterling submitted? remote cabin every year to hunt. Act compliance deadline. We will • Does your letter address the They would hunt bear, play cards continue technical assistance after good-faith efforts and concrete and drink beer, and not necessarily this meeting through SEARCH, steps your State has taken to in that order. The loser at cards through our own staff and through date to come into compliance? would have to leave the cabin to our general counsel so we can bring • Does it provide a timeline hunt for bear. If he found one, he all the States into final compliance indicating the steps that will be would kill it and bring it back so with the registration and taken to comply with the everyone could help skin it. The notification statutes. Wetterling Act? loser on this particular day dutifully As for the extension request BJA staff will contact each State left the card game, which remained letters you have been submitting, I to go over any elements missing in progress, and went to hunt bear. want to tell you where we stand from your extension request letters. He was confronted by a bear just today. When a letter meets the basic as he rounded a corner. The man requirements, we will refer it to pulled his rifle to his shoulder and Donna Feinberg in our general took aim but the gun misfired. The counsel’s office. She will review man took one look at the bear — the request to see if good faith is who was very angry at this point — demonstrated and if concrete steps threw down his gun, and ran back have been taken to legally justify to the cabin with the bear in hot and warrant a 2-year extension. pursuit. He pulled open the cabin 1 door and then jumped behind it, The letter by Ms. Gist, Director of the using the door as a shield. The bear Bureau of Justice Assistance, is included as Appendix 1. stormed into the room, and the man

Page 22 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries slammed the door shut. “I’ve got your bear,” he shouted. “ Now skin it.” We brought you this wonderful bear. Now all you have to do is skin it and bring back the material we need on this very important topic. We will work with you and do anything we can to help you reach compliance. Thank you very much.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 23 Panel question-and-answer session

Marlene Beckman, Panel Moderator Lisa Gursky Sorkin, Panel Member Donna Feinberg, Panel Member

Ms. Marlene Beckman: I want States transmit conviction data and whereby a board of experts assists a to mention one thing before we offender fingerprints to the FBI if competent court in making the begin taking questions from the they have not already been sent determination as to whether an floor. The Office of Justice there. The Lychner Act, which has individual is — or is no longer — a Programs, in cooperation with the more stringent requirements, may sexually violent predator. State Justice Institute and the be what you are referring to, but Question: When you talked National Institute of Corrections, those requirements are not in effect about community notification, it has funded a contractor to establish for another 2 years. was unclear whether guidelines the Center for Sex Offender Ms. Lisa Gursky Sorkin: You allowed for the release of Management. The Center provides may be referring to an FBI information on adult offenders technical assistance and training communication asking States to whose victims were also adults. In opportunities. send information in conjunction Illinois right now, we cannot If your jurisdiction or State is with the National Sexual Offender release information to the interested in implementing the Registry. The Attorney General set community on any offenders whose containment theory of sex offender up a national registry at the FBI in victims were adults. We can only management or exploring the response to a presidential request. release information on offenders Arizona model of lifetime The FBI asked the States to make whose victims were children. probation, which has useful data on sure their offender data are Ms. Feinberg: The guidelines sex offenders and sex offender included in the national registry. make clear that the mandatory issues, this is an opportunity for us This is related but distinct from disclosure requirement applies to to work with you. We expect to the Wetterling Act, Megan’s Law offenders convicted of crimes begin work very soon with and Lychner Act requirements we against minors and to offenders jurisdictions around the country talked about. who have been convicted of that want to improve their Question: Can you explain the sexually violent offenses, including management of sex offenders in the requirements for States that civilly offenses against adults. States have community. commit sexually violent predators? discretion to determine when it is We understand sex offender Must a State board of experts be necessary to disclose registration registration and notification laws established to civilly commit these information to protect the public are available, but we can build on predators? about registrants convicted of these to enhance community safety. Ms. Feinberg: The revised covered offenses against minors We want to work with jurisdictions guidelines make clear that civil and adults. interested in going further in commitment is an acceptable Question: Offenders are managing sex offenders in the alternative to imposition of the required to verify their addresses community. With that, I will open more stringent registration by returning forms sent to their last the floor to questions. requirements on sexually violent known addresses. Do they have to Question: The letter our State predators. That is, if your State send back fingerprints and received indicating our compliance requires civil commitment of photographs with the forms? with the Wetterling Act included individuals determined to be Ms. Feinberg: That is a information about electronically sexually violent predators, the State Lychner Act requirement. Under transmitting information to the FBI. would not need to impose address the Wetterling Act, the State law If we are not yet transmitting that verification at 90-day intervals and enforcement agency is required to information to the FBI, will we lose lifetime registration and address send out a nonforwardable address 10 percent of our Byrne Formula verification while the sexually verification form to the offender’s Grant Funds? violent predators are civilly last reported address. The offender Ms. Donna Feinberg: The committed. However, the State must sign and return the form Wetterling Act only requires that would still need to have a system within a specific time period

Page 24 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries verifying the offender’s current the last known address? Most of probation or parole, does the address. our State’s residents use post office Wetterling Act require us to inform Question: Do they also have to boxes. They can change residences the State Police? return fingerprints and as many times as they want and Ms. Feinberg: A registrant has photographs? still keep the same post office an obligation to notify the Ms. Feinberg: Not at this time boxes. How do we verify addresses designated State agency of any for compliance with the Wetterling under those circumstances? address changes under the Act. That is a requirement of the Ms. Feinberg: The Wetterling Act. If, under State Lychner Act. nonforwardable address procedures, the registrant notifies Ms. Beckman: States can enact verification form is a statutory his probation or parole officer of Lychner Act requirements now if requirement of the Federal address changes, that officer must they want, but they are not required legislation. notify the State registration agency. to do so for another 2 years. Question: I am not talking Question: As the offender’s Question: Does the Lychner about forwarding a form to a new supervising officer, do I have to Act cover any crime committed by address. I am talking about moving notify the State Police when the an adult against a child? What if an from place to place and keeping the offender notifies me of his move? 18-year-old steals a 13-year-old’s same post office box. My post Ms. Feinberg: Yes, if the State bicycle? office box and my physical location registration agency is the State Ms. Sorkin: The Lychner Act have nothing to do with each other. Police. In addition, the local law does not change the offense Ms. Beckman: That is a very enforcement agency with category requirements covered in good point. What you are saying is jurisdiction where the person has the Wetterling Act. The Wetterling the post office box is meaningless moved must be notified if the Act requires States to register for address verification. person has moved to another convicted child molesters and other Ms. Sorkin: The Wetterling Act jurisdiction. sexually violent offenders. The contains a very specific procedure Ms. Sorkin: You want to make statute defines what these that States need to follow to verify sure the information at the State categories mean. The Lychner Act addresses. We have seen States level is accurate and updated. does not enlarge the category of start to build on that minimum Question: When the offender offenders who need to register. requirement. There are States that requires supervision, I am the Ms. Beckman: You need to now require house visits, for registration agency. When they no read the Wetterling Act and the example. Law enforcement is longer require supervision, the Lychner Act in conjunction with actually checking the offender’s State Police are the registration each other. address to make sure that person is agency. That is the issue. Question: I have a question still living there. But the Wetterling Ms. Sorkin: Under the concerning address verification. Act very specifically requires the Wetterling Act structure, there Does the language in our State’s mailing of the address verification needs to be an overall central verification and notification card. repository in the State that contains legislation actually have to describe Question: But what if the information on all the State’s sex the verification process? verification card does not work? offenders. If your State follows the Ms. Feinberg: No, the State’s Ms. Beckman: Your State may Wetterling Act requirements, then address verification procedures do want to institute more stringent you need to let the central not have to be specifically spelled registration requirements. The repository know when an offender out in its legislation. If your State Wetterling Act sets a floor. In your changes his address. You are has an administrative policy particular State, you may need to keeping track of the offender. establishing its verification build on that floor. That is perfectly Question: Does the Department procedures, the policy should be okay. You can always do of Justice have the right to grant a submitted to BJA along with something more. waiver to a State that may follow a whatever legislation your State has Question: When an offender is different procedure to verify enacted or proposed so we can on probation or parole in Oregon, addresses than the one required by review them together for the local police, probation or parole the Wetterling Act, but one that compliance with the Wetterling officer is responsible for sex still achieves the same goals? We Act. offender registration. When the do not verify address in our State Question: Is it absolutely offender’s probation ends, the State by using a nonforwardable necessary to verify an address by Police are responsible. If the postcard, but we still have an sending a nonforwardable form to offender moves while he is on effective procedure in place to meet

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 25 the verification requirements. Do date of enactment, or October juvenile offenders and community you have the legislative authority to 1999. Among these new provision notification? grant waivers in these instances? are ones concerning the length of Ms. Feinberg: Under the Ms. Sorkin: No, we do not. We registration and the lifetime guidelines, juvenile offenders do are sympathetic to your concerns registration provision I mentioned not have to be covered by State because we have received similar earlier. There are also provisions registration provisions unless they inquiries from other States with covering who needs to serve on the are convicted as adults. If they do respect to address verification and State boards of experts that help the not have to register, the State does the Wetterling Act. The Act is very sentencing court determine who is not have to provide notification to specific and does not give us the a sexually violent predator. Overall, the community regarding juvenile authority to exempt States from there are about five changes that offenders. complying with certain provisions. the Lychner Act makes to the Ms. Beckman: Again, the We tried to give States as much Wetterling Act. Congress allows 3 Federal Wetterling Act and flexibility as we possibly could in years for States to comply with Megan’s Law provide minimum our guidelines. We bent over these new Lychner Act requirements. If a State chooses to backwards in interpreting some of requirements. The deadline is go further and create legislation the statutory provisions, but at the October 1999. The Lychner Act that covers juvenile offenders, that end of the day, we still have also imposes a number of other is certainly up to the State. statutory language we need to requirements on the States to Question: Are you going to implement. ensure that the FBI can do its job come up with any specific criteria Ms. Beckman: Let me also say under the Lychner Act. Those to help with risk assessment? that we are moving toward greater requirements take effect in October Ms. Feinberg: I do not believe flexibility. The Justice Department 1997, 1 year from the Lychner we are going to determine risk is trying to keep its eye on the goal Act’s date of enactment. assessment criteria for States to of good sex offender registration Question: What are the other follow. and notification systems. There requirements that the Lychner Act Question: Under the Lychner may be five different ways to reach imposes? Act, what happens if someone that goal. As long as we all get to Ms. Sorkin: The other Lychner moves to your State from another that goal, that is what is important. Act requirements are scattered State that requires registration, but I would encourage you to explain throughout the statute. We can the individual does not meet your in your submission the system you create a specific list for you, if you State’s criteria for registration? have and we will do what we can to wish. They concern making sure Ms. Feinberg: The Wetterling be flexible, but we are limited by the FBI has accurate and up-to-date Act covers a number of specific the words of the statute. We do registration information, sending offenses. States have a certain recognize that the goal is an required information to the FBI, amount of latitude in determining effective statute or program that and also making sure offenders which State offenses need to be will make sure people register and know what their responsibilities covered under their systems, but ensure that the community is are. they should be fairly similar. One notified. Let us see if we can work Question: Does the Wetterling State may not cover the exact together to get to that point. Act cover offenders who are in the offense that another State may Question: Can you please military? cover because of differences in explain the Lychner Act’s 3-year Ms. Sorkin: It is my State criminal offenses. Chances implementation schedule? understanding that sex offenders are, however, if someone required Ms. Beckman: This is the who are convicted in military to register in one State moves to clarification of the Lychner Act courts are not covered by the your State, he will probably be timetable. Wetterling Act. Basically, it covers required to register under your Ms. Sorkin: There are a number State law offenders who are subject registration provisions as well of sections of the Pam Lychner Act to registration requirements. There because of a conviction for an that directly amend the Wetterling is legislation pending in Congress offense that your State program Act. This means that every State’s right now that would extend needs to cover for compliance with registration and notification registration requirements to Federal the Wetterling Act. States need to programs must conform to these and military offenders. cover offenders who move to their new requirements. The compliance Question: Under the Federal States and require them to register timetable for these provisions of guidelines, what systems do States within 10 days of establishing the Lychner Act is 3 years from the have to have in place in regard to residency.

Page 26 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Question: How do these three statutes affect individuals who are registered as sex offenders and who committed their offenses on Indian land? Ms. Sorkin: In our guidelines, we encourage States to require Federal, military and tribal offenders who live in their jurisdictions to register because convicted sex offenders pose a similar public safety risk, regardless of where the offender was convicted. We have encouraged States to do this, but our reading of the statute is that the Wetterling Act as it currently exists does not require them to register. Question: Do the statutes indicate who should sit on the boards of experts that consider the sexually violent predator designation for certain offenders? Ms. Feinberg: The State has a lot of discretion in that respect. The revised guidelines make it clear that the board should be composed of at least two people who are experts in the treatment and behavior of sex offenders. Other than that, the board just has to be authorized under State law and it must have the authority to assist the court in making determinations about sexually violent predators. Under the Lychner Act amendments to the Wetterling Act, the boards should also include representatives of victims’ rights groups and representatives from the law enforcement community. Ms. Beckman: The additional Lychner Act requirement is not effective for another 2 years.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 27 Federal funding support

Federal funding support for sex offender registries Dr. Jan M. Chaiken Federal funding support for sex offender registries

DR. JAN M. CHAIKEN Director, Bureau of Justice Statistics U.S. Department of Justice

The Bureau of Justice Statistics be continuing in fiscal 1998 and help them participate in the (BJS) has administered the completing the originally national system; collecting related National Criminal History authorized $220 million of funding. statistical and evaluative Improvement Program (NCHIP) We believe NCHIP has resulted information; and providing since fiscal 1995. This is the kind in enormous strides forward in the technical assistance to the States. of program that percolates up from quality, accuracy, completeness BJS’s role is vital to ensure that the States to the Federal level. and accessibility of State criminal the FBI’s systems are more than Pressure and lobbying from State history records. The statistics are empty computer shells and modems representatives persuaded Congress not yet in to prove this point, but with no useful information in them. to include NCHIP grant programs we are confident that when FBI officials refer to this as in the Brady Handgun Violence SEARCH completes its survey of “populating” the FBI’s computers. Prevention Act and the National the States at the end of 1997, the It is a good expression, because a Child Protection Act.1 Congress comprehensive nature of the national sex offender registry with then actually appropriated funds for advances brought about by this no offenders in it may look nifty, those grant programs. Federal funding program will be but it is not worth much to law NCHIP has supported efforts to clear to us all. enforcement or the public. On improve databases containing August 24, 1996, President Clinton information about criminal history Federal focus on announced his goal to begin records, protection orders, domestic sex offender registries development of the registry based violence and child abuse. The The latest NCHIP program on plans developed by the FBI, BJS recent Supreme Court decision announcement, just sent to the and other Justice Department concerning the Brady Act does not States in draft form, includes a hint components. The President said he change the grant program.2 We will that our next planned focus area would include $25 million for BJS will be sexual offender registries. to provide grants and other NCHIP applications for fiscal 1997 assistance to States in his fiscal 1 Brady Act, Pub. L. No. 103-159 cannot request funding for sex year 1998 budget request. (November 30, 1993); National Child offender registries. A number of This request made its way Protection Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. you obtained Federal funding for through the Congressional 103-209 (December 20, 1993). your sex offender registries through appropriations process. The funds 2 Printz et. al. v. United States, U.S. domestic violence grants or other will be made available to help Supreme Court Case No. 95-1478, record-upgrade grants. improve sexual offender registries argued December 3, 1996, decided On June 21, 1996, President across the Nation and to conduct a June 27, 1997. Two county sheriffs Clinton issued a directive to the more formal review of individual filed separate actions protesting an Attorney General to identify States’ reporting systems, which interim Brady Act provision that obstacles to building a national sex vary in sophistication. required Chief Law Enforcement Officers of local jurisdictions to offender registry in response to the maintain an interim system to check the universal movement toward State- criminal histories of gun purchasers level sexual offender registries and until a national system is established in the fact that many sexual offenders November 1998. The U.S. Supreme may be mobile and crossing State Court ruled 5-4 in favor of the lines. As with many data systems petitioners that the provision was a of this type, the Attorney General th violation of the 10 Amendment of the delegates the building of the U.S. Constitution (States’ rights), Federal computer components to although the provision was ruled the FBI and delegates these severable from the remainder of the Brady Act, which was left intact. functions to BJS: assisting States to

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 31 Registry effort coordinates States will be permitted to use no evidence that notification with record improvements BJS’s Federal funds without regard reduces recidivism.3 Because this Presidential to whether offenders are being Therefore, as we proceed in initiative is so closely tied to registered under State law or improving registration and ongoing efforts to improve criminal according to Federal law or notification procedures, it is history records and to provide for regulations. important to keep in mind the the National Instant Criminal Federal funding applications for privacy rights being jeopardized, Background Check System (NICS) each State’s sexual offender and the number of people who are as required by the Brady Act, BJS registry will be submitted by an being harassed or losing plans to coordinate it with the agency designated by the governor or stature as a result of overall goals of better and more to administer the funds. In many registration. This provides a useable records on the criminal cases, this will be the same as the counterbalance to the public careers of offenders. The State’s NCHIP agency. We believe benefits of notification. Most of us President’s requested funding this approach will speed the believe the public benefits will be would be used largely to enhance establishment of registries. As soon large, but we have to be open- existing State systems and as funds are available, BJS will minded enough to await clear databases to better meet the know the State agency eligible to evidence and act appropriately if, requirements of the Jacob apply for funding, and we can on balance, the benefits are small. Wetterling Act, Megan’s Law and prepare an expedited process for Appropriately enough, Finn related State legislation. Funds applying for the sex offender cites the BJS’s own publication, would also be used to establish, registry portion of the NCHIP “Correctional Populations in the identify, collect and maintain a funding for fiscal 1998. United States,” which reports that standard level of sexual offender Technical assistance will be the number of sexual offenders is data for exchange through a made available by BJS directly to on the rise, jumping more than 300 National Sexual Offender Registry, the State agency that needs help percent between 1980 and 1994.4 to be managed by the FBI. upgrading its systems or interfacing Though there are inpatient and This effort would promote its registries with FBI records. outpatient treatment programs for automated input from courts and sex offenders, treatment is effective corrections, while helping to Public notification at best with a handful of offenders, automate registries currently not issues examined and there is a general perception automated. Monies would be made Much study has been devoted to that recidivism rates are high. In available to develop on-line access the issue of whether to notify the 1983, sex offenders were less likely for law enforcement throughout the public about sexual offenders living than other offenders to recidivate, States. Procedures and software in communities. Peter Finn of Abt but they were much more likely to would be developed for automated Associates, a government and recidivate into sexual offending. input. These funds can be used to business consulting and research BJS receives numerous requests develop systems and procedures for firm, conducted a study that from individuals who want to sharing registry information with examined registration and know, “What are the recidivism the FBI’s interim system or for notification systems in 32 States. rates of sexual offenders?” As I working toward the permanent He found that, although registration mentioned this morning, the latest system, which is to be part of NCIC has been evaluated and shown to be national statistical information we 2000. useful in apprehending repeat As with all of NCHIP, the offenders, the notification statutes 3 requested funds will be available to are too recent for clear evaluation U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of assist States in complying with of results. The one empirical study Justice, Sex Offender Community either State or Federal law. mentioned in Finn’s report found Notification, Research in Brief series, Complete, accurate and up-to-date by Peter Finn, Abt Associates records that are readily accessible (Washington, D.C.: Government to local law enforcement and that Printing Office, February 1997). can be linked to records in the 4 U.S. Department of Justice, Office of national registry for sharing with Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice other States are funding priorities. Statistics, Correctional Populations in the United States, 1994, by Jodi M. Brown, et. al. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, June 1996) p. 10.

Page 32 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries have on this important topic is from information made available in one National registry: 1983. We are pleased to have or more States includes an A powerful tool obtained funding from the FBI and offender’s name, address, date of The National Sexual Offender the Corrections Program Office birth, social security number, a Registry, with the participation of within the Office of Justice photo, fingerprints, criminal the States, has the potential to be a Programs recently to field a study history, place of employment and powerful tool for the law that will update these statistics. The vehicle registration. Eight States enforcement community. However, study will focus specifically on currently include blood samples for the registry will only be as valuable sexual offenders and examine DNA identification, and Michigan as the effectiveness of its database. whether DNA data assist in includes a DNA profile in the Proper safeguards must be identifying and convicting such registry if it is available. implemented to assure that the offenders. Notification laws have been public has access to information Many States have enacted challenged in the courts. I think it is that is supposed to be publicly community notification laws in safe to say that States may available while only authorized response to heightened awareness encounter two types of legal persons have access to restricted of the seeming proliferation and problems related to sex offender information about sex offenders. recidivism of sex offenders. These notification. First, civil suits may Since the laws on this vary from laws are designed to make sex be brought against agencies and State to State, the challenges are offender information available on individuals involved in the obvious, especially if an offender request to individuals and implementation of the notification travels back and forth between two organizations. They authorize or statues, perhaps for failure to States. Also, to ensure accuracy, require probation and parole remove or expunge an erroneous the system must be available for departments, law enforcement registration record, a record that quick and regular updates to reflect bodies or prosecutor offices to was reversed by the courts, or one current data in your State and in disseminate information about that had a time limit for remaining neighboring States. The released offenders to the in the registry. Second, legal development of such databases is, community at large. challenges to the statutes unquestionably, a big challenge, Community notification reflects themselves could occur. but the BJS looks forward to the perception that registration While offenders in some States supporting State efforts to develop alone is inadequate to protect the have sued to reduce their and enhance the means of making public against sex offenders, and notification status without your communities safer. that notification provides the public challenging the constitutionality of As part of our commitment to with a better means of protecting the notification statute, the courts you, the BJS funded this itself. Notification advocates have generally upheld the conference. We hope you find it believe that informing the public notification level originally useful. about the presence of a sex established. Though all States have offender in the community will some form of registry in place, allow residents to take action to certain States have more elaborate keep themselves and their families systems and technical resources out of harm’s way. Others believe than others. Some may only be that making offenders notify capable of initiating very limited communities on their own may be record keeping to provide ill-advised, has great potential for identification of newly convicted unreliability and is inconsistent eligible sexual offenders. For these with efforts to rehabilitate jurisdictions, assistance will be offenders. provided to automate or retrieve However, there is a great deal of relevant records of offenders’ past work involved to determine the convictions. States with more geographic range of identification; advanced registries will want to to decide who receives notice; to focus their grant funds on consider hearings for offenders developing communication who want to contest their interfaces with the FBI. notification status; and the actual process of notification. For those who do not know, typical

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 33 FBI panel: Interim and permanent solutions

History and current status of a national sex offender registry Emmet A. Rathbun The impact of the Lychner Act Ralph C. Thomas History and current status of a national sex offender registry

EMMET A. RATHBUN Unit Chief, Criminal Justice Information Services Division Federal Bureau of Investigation

I am here today to speak on the national sexual predator and child At its October 1995 Board history and current status of the molester registration system. He meeting, NLETS decided that National Sexual Offender Registry. asked that the plan be ready for his States should create a “message In the Fall of 1995, the FBI’s review by August 20, 1996. The key” that would permit the Criminal Justice Information President’s directive made it electronic search of State sex Service’s Advisory Policy Board necessary for the FBI to develop a offender registry information, just (CJIS APB) began to discuss the national registry mechanism to as driving record information is benefits of a national sex offender operate on an interim basis until shared across State lines. NLETS registry and where the registry delivery of the NCIC 2000 system. requested that the message keys be could best be housed. The directive required the creation in place by November 1996. Suggestions were made to of a national system based on the During his Saturday radio designate the registry as a National Wetterling Act that allowed address on August 24, 1996, the Crime Information Center (NCIC) national access to the sexual President announced he had “Hot File” or to include it in the offender registration information received the Attorney General’s Interstate Identification Index (III). maintained in each of the plans for implementing a National Since the Wetterling Act1 strongly individual State systems. Sexual Offender Registry. He encouraged States to establish The FBI’s long-term plans still committed to the Nation that the sexual offender registries, and called for the creation of a sexual Attorney General’s planned system many States had started to offender Hot File in the NCIC 2000 would be operational within 6 implement them, the APB system, but the Bureau had to months, or by February 24, 1997. determined that a national index assemble an interim plan to meet Through diligent hard work and listing the State database or agency the President’s goals for a national determination, the FBI was able to that maintained the detailed sexual offender registry to be deliver the interim provisions for registrant information would be available in the period before the use on February 23, 1997. appropriate. NCIC 2000 system is up and The interim provisions The APB also decided that this running. encourage States to submit sexual index would be designated as a To address the President’s offender registration data — NCIC Hot File to allow maximum directive, the FBI looked for the including the registrant’s name, accessibility to all law lowest impact solution in terms of date of birth, the date the enforcement. The Board delayed development cost and registration began, the date the establishment of the Hot File until implementation time. The FBI’s registration expires, the case after delivery of the NCIC 2000 interim solution, proposed to the number and the registering system to avoid the cost of President under the Attorney agency’s Originating Identification programming both systems since General’s signature on August 22, Number (ORI) — to the FBI for no urgency for the national registry 1996, called for a modified version inclusion in the subject’s criminal was evident, either legislatively or of its existing Flash Program with a history record. To ensure that all from users. link provided to each State’s sex entries into the FBI’s database are On June 25, 1996, President offender registry through the based on positive fingerprint Clinton issued a directive to the National Law Enforcement identification, the FBI also requires Attorney General instructing her to Telecommunications System the subject’s FBI number and State develop a plan to implement a (NLETS). (The Flash Program is identification number, if the State used to track Federal parolees and has established such a number for probationers.) the subject. 1 The Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Program, 42 U.S.C. ¤ 14071.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 37 The FBI recognizes that some prior to the identification communities who are known sexual law enforcement agencies may not information included in their FBI offenders and respond accordingly. have forwarded the records of all identification record. Specific It is intended to serve foremost as a convicted sexual offenders for registration information will appear preventative measure and, inclusion in the III. In these at the end of the FBI identification secondarily, as an investigative aid. instances, the FBI requires the record similar to the format used The tool will only work, however, submission of a criminal fingerprint for the inclusion of a wanted with the cooperation and card along with the registration notice. participation of all States. data so a record can be established. Registration information The convicted sexual offender To maximize the amount of presented in the FBI identification registry will be a Hot File in NCIC information contributed to the record will include the name the 2000. As most of you are aware, interim national sexual offender subject is registered under; the NCIC 2000 is being developed as a registry, the FBI accepts input, registering agency’s name and ORI replacement system to the current modification and deletion data in number; the registering agency’s NCIC system. In addition to three formats: Batch tapes; on-line case number; the date registration providing a new software and transmissions to the III; or through began; and the date registration hardware environment, NCIC 2000 the use of the FBI’s “Flash/Sexual expires. The expiration date may be will add new capabilities, new data Offender Registration/Cancellation “non-expiring” for individuals fields, enhanced security and Notice” I-12 Form. required to register for life. greater capacity and growth It is important to note that the The registering agency’s ORI potential. submitting State is responsible for provided in the rap sheet can be By maintaining the registry in ensuring that the registrant data are used to contact the registering NCIC 2000, enormous benefits are current and accurate. The FBI agency via NLETS, or by other anticipated. As a Hot File, the encourages States to develop the means, to obtain specific registry information will be capability to add, modify and delete registration data. available to law enforcement under registry data via the III. Even States To date, more than 17,000 III routine circumstances. A Hot File that are not III participants can use records contain sexual offender check is done almost every time a the III for sexual offender registration data. Nine States2 are vehicle is stopped for a traffic registration purposes. actively registering offenders at the violation or a traffic stop. The The registry data are posted to national level. Several others are officer checks to see if the vehicle the subject’s criminal history and testing software for on-line access, is stolen or if the driver has any provided as a part of the subject’s or are preparing to submit paper outstanding warrants. By record each time an authorized registration forms. The sexual maintaining the registry in NCIC record request is made. A subject’s offender registries of 9 States3 are 2000, sex offender information will status as a registered sexual available via NLETS. be available to officers conducting offender is prominently displayed Although we are often inclined routine traffic stops. in response to both III name to focus on the gross statistics, With this knowledge, the officer searches (QH) and record requests painful cases such as those that may be able to prevent a crime (QR) transactions. In answer to a prompted enactment of the Jacob such as this scenario: A car with a name check, the response notes that Wetterling Act, Megan’s Law and male driver and a young boy is the subject of record is a registered the Pam Lychner Act remind us of pulled over for speeding. A check sexual offender. To determine the the importance of each entry into on the name and date of birth of the Originating Agency Identifier the national index, whether it is in driver results in a hit from the (ORI) number, case number and the the interim system or the NCIC registry identifying the offender as registry start and expiration dates, a 2000 file. The national index is a a pedophile. record request must be made. tool law enforcement officials can Since vehicle information can be Sexual offender registration will use to identify citizens in their included in the registry, searches by be noted in a subject’s rap sheet in license plate may also identify the the same manner, regardless of individual as a registered sexual 2 whether the rap sheet is obtained Arizona, Georgia, , offender. Consider this scenario: via the III, in response to a record Oklahoma, South Carolina, South An individual is sitting in his car in request (QR) or via the mail. A Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and front of an elementary school. An notice indicating that the record Washington. officer’s instincts alert him that 3 subject is a registered sexual Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, something seems out of place. A offender will appear immediately Massachusetts, North Carolina, South check on the individual’s license Carolina, South Dakota and Tennessee.

Page 38 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries plate results in a hit from the The Wetterling Act does not registry. require Federal agencies to register Also, law enforcement may sexual offenders. However, the become aware of offenders who U.S. Department of Justice fail to re-register after moving. guidelines relating to the Based on the law within a Wetterling Act encourage States to respective State, an arrest may be require registration of Federal and permitted under these military offenders. Although the circumstances. Unique to the Wetterling Act, as amended to date, registry is the capability to conduct fails to address responsibilities of on-line searches by ZIP code that other Federal agencies associated may identify possible suspects with registering Federal offenders, during an active investigation. the amendment imposed by the NCIC 2000 contains two new Lychner Act has the potential to capabilities that will facilitate the place a tremendous burden on the new burdens required under the FBI, both in terms of field offices Pam Lychner Act.4 First, images registering offenders and the CJIS (offenders’ mug shots) can be Division processing fingerprints. entered by the user and linked to a Mr. Ralph Thomas, the next record. Second, a fingerprint (right speaker, will offer further index) can be linked to the record, discussion on the matter. and a user can initiate a fingerprint search by scanning the right index finger of the subject. All records in the convicted sexual offender registry require an FBI number to enable flagging of the subject’s criminal history record. This ensures the benefits of the interim system will continue and allows compliance under the Pam Lychner Act (which requires that registry information be released for conducting employment-related background checks under the National Child Protection Act of 1993).5

4 Pam Lychner Sexual Offender Tracking and Identification Act of 1996, 42 U.S.C. ¤ 14072. 5 Pub L. No. 103-209 (December 20, 1993).

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 39 The impact of the Lychner Act

RALPH C. THOMAS Supervisory Special Agent Ð Policy, Planning and Analysis Unit Criminal Investigative Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation

I work at the FBI Criminal under the Lychner Act and In terms of the potential impact Investigative Division in the attempted to assess other policy of the Lychner Act on FBI Policy, Planning and Analysis Unit. issues relating to the Act, including resources, I will reiterate that the This unit addresses policy issues some very serious resource FBI must register sex offenders that could impact the operations of implications that may arise. At the who reside in States that do not the Criminal Investigative Division meeting’s conclusion, we decided have minimally sufficient sex at FBI headquarters in Washington, that it is the task force’s goal to registration programs as defined by D.C., as was well as FBI criminal address policy and procedure for the Lychner Act. This registration investigations being conducted in effective implementation of the must include a current address, the field. I want to provide some Lychner Act at both FBI fingerprints and a photograph. background information on the task headquarters and out in the FBI’s Registration must continue for at force we assembled at FBI field offices nationwide. least 10 years, although the most headquarters in October 1996 to It is difficult to determine what serious, repeat sex offenders, called address the Bureau’s the FBI’s role will be in meeting sexually violent predators, must responsibilities under the Pam the registration requirements of the register for life. Lychner Act.1 I have been de facto Lychner Act. The Act requires the By complying with the Lychner chair of this task force since my co- FBI to register released sex Act, the FBI would have a chair received a promotion to offenders in States that do not have significant burden placed on all its another position. minimally sufficient registration field offices, which would have to The task force is comprised of programs. Since we do not know actively take part in the registration representatives from various how many States will be deemed process by taking fingerprints and divisions at FBI headquarters, “minimally sufficient” in terms of photographs of offenders who are including the Criminal their registration obligations, we do required to register. This would be Investigative Division, the Criminal not fully know what our problematic, considering that we Justice Information Services (CJIS) responsibilities are going to be. have very remote satellite offices in Division, the Information Congress created this provision the FBI called Resident Agencies. Resources Division (which for direct registration with the FBI We have 56 major field offices, but manages the information that goes as a back-up or fail-safe measure. we also have one-man, special into systems used by the FBI), the We were to act as a back-up in the agent offices scattered throughout Congressional Affairs Office, and remote possibility that some States the United States. You can likely our finance office. Virtually every would not have minimally foresee some of the registration division of the Bureau is sufficient sex offender registration problems that could happen with represented except for the programs. It now appears there may sex offenders located in the remote Counterintelligence Division. be a lot more States than we ever plains of North Dakota, for The first meeting of this task anticipated that will not be example. Where do they register? force was held in October 1996. minimally sufficient when it comes Do they register with the Resident We discussed the FBI’s sexual to their registration programs. Agency or do they register with the offender registration obligations Therefore, we are in the process of FBI field office? Will our smaller implementing the Lychner Act offices have the necessary guidelines, but we do not know resources to register sex offenders? 1 The Pam Lychner Sexual Offender what our responsibilities are until These are the types of questions we Tracking and Identification Act of the U.S. Department of Justice lets discuss during our task force 1996, 42 U.S.C. ¤ 14072, requires the us know how many States will not meetings. FBI database be used for registration of have minimally sufficient In addition, we will have to sex offenders for States that do not programs. assign personnel and organize maintain “minimally sufficient sexual offender registration program(s).” efforts to input the FBI’s

Page 40 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries registration information into the locate these offenders for implementation strategies. Please interim National Sexual Offender registration violations. call me at FBI headquarters to talk Registry system and, ultimately, The cost of that burden is very about these issues, because the into National Crime Information difficult for the FBI to quantify. FBI’s registration and notification Center 2000. The CJIS Division Our budget office put together obligations under the Pam Lychner would be required to verify the some projections using fugitive Act will not succeed unless we offender’s fingerprints prior to statistics from our California field work closely with the States and entry of the registration record in offices along with information with local law enforcement the national registry. Currently, we about noncompliant sex offenders officials. have a bit of a backlog with provided by the California My telephone number at FBI fingerprints. That is a problem we Department of Justice. The results headquarters is (202) 324-3241. are going to have to work out were potentially staggering in terms Please call me if you have any before the implementation of the of the impact on FBI personnel and questions or need more information Lychner Act requirements. nonpersonnel resources. about the Jacob Wetterling and Another issue concerns The bottom line, based on the Pam Lychner Act requirements and procedures to record address computations, was that we would how your State can meet them. changes. The FBI must establish a have to take every agent in each of method to notify appropriate State our four California field divisions or local authorities and to modify — San Diego, Los Angeles, the national registry when a Sacramento and San Francisco — registered offender changes and assign them full-time to look residences. This creates further for sex offenders who are burdens on the CJIS and noncompliant (those who cannot be Information Resources Divisions at located or who did not register). FBI headquarters. That means every agent in every Address verification is another one of these four divisions, not just responsibility. The FBI must those who investigate violent periodically verify the addresses of crimes but also those who sex offenders it registers. The investigate drug and organized address of a sexually violent crime, white-collar crime and predator must be verified every 90 espionage cases — basically, every days. That puts substantial FBI agent in every one of our demands on the manpower of our California offices. violent crime squads in the field, Community notification is the inasmuch as the only effective way final issue. If appropriate, the FBI to verify an offender’s address is to may release relevant information physically contact the offender. concerning a registered offender Address verification also requires that is necessary to protect the submission of additional public. Again, this would involve fingerprints and photographs. The FBI personnel from the CJIS FBI’s CJIS Division would once Division, the Information again have to verify the submitted Resources Division, the Criminal fingerprints. Investigative Division and the Another major responsibility Office of Public and Congressional involves the search for fugitives. Affairs. We are currently working The FBI must locate offenders on a policy that addresses the whose addresses cannot be verified. community notification provisions If a registered sex offender cannot of the Act. One possible strategy be located, the FBI will have to would utilize a centralized database obtain an arrest warrant and include at FBI headquarters that would be the offender on the NCIC’s wanted available to our field offices. persons file. Our field office One of the reasons I looked personnel would conceivably have forward to attending this to conduct fugitive investigations to conference was to learn more about the States’ Wetterling/Lychner Act

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 41 Overview of current State laws

Status and latest developments in sex offender registration and notification laws Elizabeth A. Pearson

Litigation issues Arguments used to challenge notification laws — and the government’s response Dena T. Sacco

Pending legislation Status of Federal legislation on sex offenders and changes to current laws Robert R. Belair Status and latest developments in sex offender registration and notification laws

ELIZABETH A. PEARSON Staff Associate/Congressional Liaison National Criminal Justice Association

I want to talk today about the Massachusetts created its Pros and cons history and evolution of State sex registration and notification People who support and offender registration and provisions in August 1996, advocate for sex offender notification laws and their quick becoming the last State to do so. registration and notification cite the development, especially within the The first sex offender registry was following reasons for doing so: past few years. I want to briefly created by California in 1947. • The significant number of discuss the pros and cons of Arizona, Florida, Nevada, Ohio and sex offenders under registry and notification laws and Alabama followed suit in the 1950s community supervision. A what supporters and opponents of and 1960s. Clearly, the most recent December 1996 statistic from the laws have to say about them. period of activity has been in the the Bureau of Justice Statistics I will also touch on the nuts and 1990s, with 38 States creating indicates that, on any given bolts of registration and notification provisions since 1994. day, there are approximately systems, the similarities and Notification systems have 234,000 sex offenders under differences of State laws, and evolved much more recently. They the care and custody of the legislative efforts certain States allow information from the sex States, 60 percent of whom are undertook in 1997 to change their offender registry to be disseminated under conditional supervision laws. I do not intend to present an either to specific people in the in the community.2 exhaustive list of enactments, but I community or in a specific manner, • Fear of recidivism. Research will provide a flavor of what is or to be made available for public finds that sex offenders going on in the States. view. The purpose of the commit a wide range and a Finally, I want to address cost information release is to increase large number of sexually issues and other policy implications public awareness of sex offenders deviant acts in their offending in terms of implementation of these in a particular area. lives and are reluctant to fully laws. Sex offender registration and The first notification law was disclose their offense history. notification is a resource-intensive created in Washington State in • Tools for law enforcement to proposition, so I want to examine 1990 when the Community assist in investigations, and cost issues as well as other Protection Act was approved.1 grounds for holding those impediments and facilitators to Since then, 44 other States have who do not comply with implementation. created notification systems. registration laws. Law Recent information from the enforcement is aided by laws Evolution Washington State Institute for that help identify people and The first thing I would like to Public Policy indicates that Hawaii, that keep offenders under discuss is the evolution of sex Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska and surveillance and in line with offender registries. Registration New Mexico are the five States that their responsibilities to laws require sex offenders to currently do not have notification register. provide certain identifying provisions. information to law enforcement and corrections officials when they are 2 released from custody for U.S. Department of Justice, Office of supervision in the community. All Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice States had these laws on the books Statistics, Sex Offenses and Offenders, An Analysis of Data on Rape and as of 1996. Sexual Assault, by Lawrence A. Greenfeld (Washington, D.C.: 1 WASH REV. CODE ANN. ¤ Government Printing Office, February 9A.44.130 (West 1988 & Supp. 1997). 1997).

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 45 • Deterring sex offenders. laws share several common for relief. She found that at least 11 Offenders may be reluctant to features.3 States have expungement commit new crimes if they The first is that these registries provisions, 10 of which apply when know information about the are maintained by a State agency, the conviction is set aside or crimes will be added to the while local law enforcement is reversed. Only Connecticut registry and would be passed responsible for collecting automatically expunges the on to the community. information. This is not the case in offender’s record after his • Offering citizens information every State, but it is common in registration term expires. to protect their children and most States. As of 1996, 13 States had their families. Typically, the information address verification provisions, Those who oppose registration collected includes the offender’s most of which require annual and notification laws cite the name, address, photograph, birth registration. Four States required following reasons: date and social security number. In verification every 90 days. Of • False sense of security. Some most States, the initial timeframe to these, New Jersey and Vermont fear that registration and register runs from immediately require address verification every notification systems promote a after release to 30 days. Duration of 90 days for all offenders, whereas false sense of security. They the registration requirement is New York and Pennsylvania fear citizens may rely too typically 10 years or more. Most require only sexually violent heavily on the information registries are updated only when an predators to verify addresses every being released and not account offender notifies law enforcement 90 days. for sex offenders who are not he is changing his address. Most The information I have on the registered because they may be laws apply equally to offenders retroactive application of new to an area, or because they convicted in other States. registration and notification plea bargained to a lesser requirements is not the most up-to- crime not included in sex Differences date, but I think it is interesting. In offender registration laws. A number of features are 1995, the New York State Division • Vigilantism, harassment. different from State to State with of Criminal Justice Services There is concern about respect to registration laws. surveyed 44 States which, at that vigilantism and harassment of The first is the lifetime time, had registration provisions. offenders trying to get their registration requirement. As of Twenty-two States had provisions lives back together. 1996, only 15 States required in place to apply registration • Offenders avoid treatment. lifetime registration for some or all requirements retroactively under Some fear these laws inhibit of their sex offenders. certain circumstances. I note that offenders from seeking Another feature that differs is the many of those States had court treatment. petition for relief from registration cases pending to assess the • No data on effectiveness. requirements. According to retroactivity application. I think There is also a lack of information published by Elizabeth most decisions based on retroactive evaluation of proven Rahmberg-Walsh in her text, “The application of registry laws effectiveness in terms of Sex Offender,” at least 11 States indicated that retroactive compliance and arrest rates. allow offenders to petition for relief application in this sense was • Migration. There is the fear from registration requirements.4 considered regulatory and remedial that communities with lax or Rahmberg-Walsh also conducted and not punitive. It was, therefore, less-stringent registration and research on the difference between permissible. notification provisions will expunging records and petitioning Another unique feature concerns make it more difficult to track the registration of juvenile offender movements. 3 Staci Thomas and Roxanne Lieb, Sex offenders. As of 1996, 13 States Offender Registration: A Review of required youths convicted as sex Common features State Laws (Olympia, Washington: offenders to register. Of course, Information from the Washington State Institute for Public juveniles tried in adult court are Washington State Institute for Policy, 1995). required to register. Public Policy and other sources 4 Elizabeth Rahmberg Walsh, Megan’s Sanctions for failing to register indicate that most State registration Law — Sex Offender Registration and and penalties for violation of Notification Statutes and Constitutional registration laws vary significantly. Challenges, THE SEX OFFENDER, Most States levy Civic Research Institute, Inc., 1997, p. charges for those types of 24-4.

Page 46 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries violations, although several States Corrections provides this individuals who deal with children; increase the penalty severity for information. Risk assessment and and to registered daycare facilities. repeat offenders. Four other States notification levels are based on a — California, Mississippi, Oregon, tiered process. For example, first- — Passive notification and Washington — vary the time offenders are considered low- Passive notification is the third penalty based on the severity of the risk, which corresponds to a level- category. It allows the public to offense. one notification. Information sent view sex offender information As of 1996, 9 States allow DNA to law enforcement may be shared maintained at a central location. to be collected and inserted in the with other law enforcement, This process is used in several registry. Federal laws do not victims and witnesses. This is a States, including Alaska, Colorado, require DNA collection, depending fairly common method of Kansas, Michigan and Oklahoma, instead on fingerprint and notification. Other states that utilize where the State maintains a list of photograph identification. the tiered process are Arizona, New registered sex offenders for view at Jersey, Rhode Island, Washington the local level. Four notification categories and Wyoming. Notification methods fall into Many States allow law — Combination four basic categories: enforcement some discretion in The final category combines • Active or broad notification. releasing information they find elements of the previous three. State law defines which types relevant and necessary to the Several States use a combination of of offenders require community. Two examples are notification methods. California, community notification, as Tennessee and Montana. Tennessee for instance, recently released a well as the scope of the notification is based on the need to CD-ROM containing sex offender notification effort. In other protect the public. Information is information. It also established a words, citizens do not have to released by county sheriffs, who World Wide Web page and a 900- seek out information before actively make the notification prefix telephone number residents they are notified. determinations themselves. In can call to get information about • Limited disclosure. Refers to Montana, notification can begin sex offenders. Here, the passive those States that notify certain when a court order exists allowing approach is combined with a more groups or agencies about the the release of information. When active approach, which allows law presence of sex offenders in that happens, officials use a press enforcement agencies to disclose their community based on a release to distribute the information information to the community. fear that those groups may be to the community. Wisconsin has a similar system. negatively impacted. Many States specifically define It established an 800-prefix • Passive notification. Requires the method and scope of the telephone number with law community groups or notification necessary. Examples enforcement discretion in individuals to take the include Alabama, Louisiana and determining the scope of initiative to request Delaware. In Alabama, residents community notification. Texas information about sex are notified by mail and copies of provides notification via the offenders in the community. registry information are posted in newspaper in both English and • Combination. The fourth various public buildings. The scope Spanish. Residents of a particular category combines ingredients of notification is dependent on the community can obtain information of the previous three. size and the population of the area. from their law enforcement agencies that is directly related to — Active notification — Limited disclosure that specific community. The first category I want to The second category of address is active notification. There notification is limited disclosure. Risk assessment are three ways States conduct Several States allow limited Risk assessment is important to active notification. disclosure of sex offender the success of registration and The first is “tiering.” Many information to organizations or notification programs. According to States have a tiered process to officials who might be vulnerable the Washington State Institute of assess risk and then base to sex offenders in the community. Public Policy, risk is most often notification on that risk assessment. One example is Indiana, where the assessed upon conviction or release In Minnesota, which enacted its statute requires notification to all from incarceration. There are community notification law in public and nonpublic schools; to several types of risk assessment. 1996, the Department of State agencies that license or hire Some States classify risk based on

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 47 the history of offense. For example, County, Oregon, also has a Web provisions in 1997. The Wyoming California’s classification is based site. law is similar to the Minnesota law on the violent sex offenses and in that it provides a tiered process violent non-sex offenses that the Legislative changes to conduct notification.6 It offender has in his criminal history. Various legislative actions have considers a variety of risk Other States use risk assessment changed certain States’ registration assessment factors. Is the offender tools, objective measures or and notification laws over the past under supervision or receiving guidelines to help determine the year. The first area I want to talk counseling or therapy? Does his offender’s risk level. about is compliance legislation. A criminal history include a high Some States allow the court to lot of States are struggling to come probability of recidivism? What make the risk determination and into compliance with the Federal were his offenses? some States use a board or panel of law. A couple of States considered The State of Nevada enacted a experts to assess risk. and a couple passed compliance significant piece of legislation For example, the Minnesota End legislation. related to sex offender laws that of Confinement Review Committee The first I would like to discuss included some very interesting consists of a treatment specialist, a is Illinois. The Illinois Legislature provisions, and I thought I would victims’ rights representative and a has approved two bills to amend share them with you. The bill law enforcement official to help current law to bring the State’s expands the conditions that a make risk determinations for the registration and notification convicted sex offender must meet State. provisions into compliance with the while on probation.7 They include No risk level is assigned in Jacob Wetterling Act. It is my abiding by a curfew, submitting to broad notification. Notification is understanding that neither bill has a examination and automatically dispensed for certain been signed. They are awaiting the abstaining from alcohol use. It sex offenders. In Georgia, for governor’s signature. He is allows for the collection of DNA example, the notification expected to sign one or the other. samples and imposes a fee on requirement applies to all convicted They contain similar provisions to offenders in certain circumstances child sex offenders. bring Illinois into compliance with to support collection and testing of Finally, in some States, such as the Wetterling Act and the Federal that information. It clarifies that Tennessee, law enforcement Megan’s Law. real estate agents are not officials determine the risk an The bills would require a responsible for disclosing offender poses to the community. released sex offender to register information to buyers or buyers’ with the proper agency within 10 agents about sex offenders in the Technology days of release rather than the community. It also extends current As many of you are aware, current 30 days. The Illinois State law to allow some collection of technology has entered the Police would conduct address information on juvenile offenders. discussion of registration and verification by mail and sexually Utah and Washington made notification laws. California just dangerous individuals would slight technical changes to their released a CD-ROM containing register with local law enforcement laws. Utah added some offenses to registry information. Several States every 90 days for life. comply with Federal law and also have telephone banks people can The second State I want to added an address verification call to access registry information: discuss is North Dakota. In 1997, component.8 Washington made they are California, Florida, North Dakota enacted a compliance several clarifications. The revised Wisconsin and New York. In bill to create a qualified board of Washington law now requires the Florida and Wisconsin, the State experts to make sexually violent Washington Association of Sheriffs provides an 800-prefix telephone predator determinations.5 The bill and Police Chiefs to develop a number. California and New York requires sex offenders to register model policy for law enforcement provide a 900-prefix telephone for 10 years. Sexually violent when disclosing information about number. predators would be required to Florida, Indiana and Kansas register for life. 6 th offer sex offender information on Wyoming was one of the States HB 0061, 54 Legislature of the State Web sites. One county in Michigan that instituted notification of Wyoming, (Feb. 20, 1997) (enacted). 7 th has established a Web site run by a SB 325, 97 Legislature of the State local newspaper using information of Nevada, (July 16, 1997) (enacted). provided by the sheriff. Benton 5 HB 1048, 55th Legislative Assembly, 8 SB 5759, 55th Legislature of the State State of North Dakota, (March 24, of Washington, (April 22, 1997) 1997) (enacted). (enacted).

Page 48 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries sex offenders.9 It also requires the they sometimes lacked the I want to reiterate a point made Department of Health and Human information to apply criteria earlier. There are many issues Services and the Sentence Review consistently. Respondents also surrounding sex offenders and the Board to report to the legislature on reported that the process of laws I discussed today that have not the number of offenders who are in tracking and identifying out-of- been fully researched. There is a each classification level. State offenders is incredibly limited body of empirical analysis difficult at times. on the efficacy of sex offender Cost The National Criminal Justice registration and notification We have cost information from Association, the organization I provisions. The State of New Jersey detailing what that work with, conducted in-depth case Washington, for example, State spent supporting registration studies of 4 States and their conducted some empirical and notification systems. In fiscal experiences implementing evaluation. 1997, New Jersey spent registration laws. We found the Other areas that merit study approximately $700,000 from the following impediments to include cost and compliance issues, Local Law Enforcement Block notification and registration: the issue of whether these laws can Grant Program and from State • The first is dissemination of simultaneously address an funds to update its DNA database. registry notification in offender’s rights and community A reported $400,000 in State funds passive notification States. protection, and questions over the and $200,000 in State forfeiture One person we interviewed in accessibility of information. There money was allocated to State Alaska said there were is a need to better coordinate the prosecutors to try sex offender questions in the community dissemination of information and cases. Some $700,000 in State and from the public library best practices so we make funds went to public defenders for about the wider dissemination registration and notification laws tier classification hearings. of the information once it has workable and implement them in been purchased lawfully. concert with other policies and Challenges • Another is the impact of procedures to effectively manage The National Institute of Justice notification on incest victims. sex offenders in the community. (NIJ) prepared a Research in I do not think this study is the Action report on this topic, first to identify that as a published in February 1997.10 In challenge. There is certainly 1996, NIJ representatives talked to concern that reporting these 13 criminal justice practitioners in types of crimes would have a 8 States as well as 2 national chilling effect because of the experts on sex offender laws. They victim’s fear of being found there were few impediments identified when broader to implementation and that States community notification is are not having a difficult time conducted for incest implementing these laws, with the perpetrators. exception of resources. • Finally, there is concern However, survey respondents about the accuracy of revealed several challenges they registry information. One of faced. The first was assigning risk. our respondents from New Respondents found it difficult from Jersey indicated concern about time to time to assign risk because the dissemination of information and keeping only accurate information in the 9 HB 0348, Legislature of the State of database. The respondent also Utah, 1997 General Session, (March 5, noted some trouble with 1997) (enacted) . vigilantism and harassment in 10 U.S. Department of Justice, Office cases where notification was of Justice Programs, National Institute provided on an unofficial level. of Justice, Sex Offender Community Notification, Research in Brief series, by Peter Finn, Abt Associates (Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, February 1997).

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 49 Arguments used to challenge notification laws — and the government’s response

DENA T. SACCO Counsel, Office of Policy Development U.S. Department of Justice

As many of you know, sex I first am going to discuss the standards we think will be very offenders have challenged legal issues raised in cases helpful in the notification context, registration and community regarding registration and although the decision dealt with a notification laws across the notification laws. I will try to civil commitment statute rather country. Thus far, the challenges provide a picture of where the than a community notification law. have been to State laws. The pending litigation stands and how Litigating sex offenders usually Federal government has defended soon cases might be resolved. In raise three primary Federal many State laws as a friend of the doing so, I am going to address the constitutional claims. State law court, filing amicus briefs in cases U.S. Supreme Court’s recent claims are also raised, but because in New Jersey, Washington, decision in the Kansas v. Hendricks they are particular to the individual Connecticut and New York. case,2 which applied some State, I am not going to discuss In these cases, registration itself them. Constitutional claims center seldom is a problem. Virtually on three arguments: every court addressing the issue has Doe v. Pataki, 120 F.3rd 1263 (2nd Cir. • The first claim is punishment. found registration to be 1997), reh. denied, September 25, Sex offenders contend that constitutional. Community 1997. Note that, although the community notification laws notification is more problematic. Connecticut case dealt only with the impose additional punishment The courts also have upheld it for administrative law and not after the fact, on top of the Connecticut’s statute, the court did the most part, but some lower mention the statute and there is some punishment already imposed courts and the Kansas Supreme indication that the decision will end up by their criminal sentences and Court, have struck down precluding challenges to the statute that this punishment is community notification laws as itself. In the cases challenging the New excessively harsh. violations of the U.S. Constitution. Jersey and Washington statutes, the • The second claim is privacy. As a result, notification is still very lower Federal court had upheld the Sex offenders contend that much an open question. It will statute. The Third and Ninth Circuits community notification remain open until a Federal appeals affirmed those decisions, holding that invades their constitutional court, or perhaps even the U.S. the notification provisions did not right to privacy. Supreme Court, addresses it.1 constitute ex post facto punishment. • The third claim is due process. The Ninth Circuit also held that Washington’s notification provisions Offenders claim the laws 1 did not constitute punishment under the violate their right to due The four cases that were pending process. before the U.S. Courts of Appeals when Clause, and did not this presentation was given have now violate the offenders’ rights to privacy I will take each of them in turn or due process. See E.B. v. Verneiro, and try to explain the arguments been decided. All have held that rd community notification does not 119 F3rd 1077 (3 Cir. 1997) reh. made for and against the laws. constitute punishment in violation of denied, September 17, 1997; Stearns v. the Constitution. In the cases Gregoire, 1997 WL 539074 The issue of punishment challenging Connecticut’s (September 4, 1997). Rehearing Punishment is the most frequent administrative rule and New York’s petitions are pending in Roe and claim brought in these cases. In statute, the lower Federal courts had Stearns. 2 order to prove many constitutional overturned the rule or statute. In both, Kansas v. Hendricks, 117 S. Ct. 2072 claims, including ex post facto the Second Circuit reversed the lower (1997). In a June 23, 1997, decision, (retroactivity) and double jeopardy, court, holding that the rule or statute’s the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a notification provisions did not portion of Kansas’ Sexually Violent an offender has to prove that the constitute ex post facto punishment. Predator Act that allows the civil See Roe v. Office of Adult Probation, commitment of individuals who have offenses but who are determined to still 1997 WL 546244 (September 8, 1997); finished their prison terms for sex constitute a threat to the public.

Page 50 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries law actually imposes punishment. cannot be attributed to the type of or to prevent the State from using A sex offender typically contends community notification laws that the information for public safety that, if the public is informed about exist in many States. In fact, most purposes. his crimes and convictions, he is State programs are tied to a Aside from the Federal going to be subject to public determination of public safety Constitution, not even common law ridicule, shaming, ostracism, job necessity based on the likely recognizes a privacy interest in the discrimination and housing danger that the offender poses to type of information States discrimination. Typically he will the public. Information usually is disseminate under notification point to a few prominently reported given out with caution as to its laws, because it is public record incidents of harassment or proper use. information already exposed to vigilantism. He will say he cannot The State makes clear that the public view. Furthermore, even if protect himself or his family information is not to be used for there were a constitutional privacy against these threats. Offenders illegal purposes. The State might right in this type of information, it also claim notification is going to even warn the public that illegal would be limited because privacy prevent them getting a fresh start in acts will be prosecuted and that rights involve a balancing test. One the community. They argue that all they could undermine the would balance the public interest in these factors put together constitute effectiveness of the notification protecting victims or potential punishment that the State is laws. New Jersey, for example, victims and in having the public imposing upon them for their issues these types of warnings information available against the crime. along with notification. offender’s right to anonymity in State and Federal governments Washington holds community these circumstances. make several different arguments in meetings to address some of these response. First, they point out that issues. I would be very interested to The issue of due process notification acts actually are know what other States are doing to The third claim that is raised is intended and designed for public deal with the threat of vigilantism due process. The Constitution protection, not for punishment. In or harassment in notification. guarantees individuals the right to fact, community notification does Finally, the likelihood of due process of law when the State no more than provide the vigilantism will decrease as threatens to take away an interest in information necessary to make the notification becomes more life, liberty or property. Sex public and vulnerable individuals common and as we begin to offenders often contend that aware of the potential danger posed understand how this process works. community notification infringes by sex offenders and let them know on their liberty interest and, how to protect themselves and their The issue of privacy therefore, it cannot be imposed families. The second issue sex offenders without extensive, -like Second, the government points raise is privacy. They often claim procedures. out that sex offender information, that, when the community becomes The State and Federal such as an offender’s name, address aware of the offender’s crime, the government respond that there is no and convictions, is already a matter offender is going to lose his ability liberty interest involved in of public record, or at least is to recede into anonymity and to get community notification. The laws publicly observable information. a fresh start. State and Federal provide information only. They do The government argues that any governments respond that this is not impose any restraint on the shame, ridicule or ostracism the not a constitutionally protected offender. True, an offender has to offender may experience is the privacy interest. In fact, the register under the registration laws, result of the offender’s own act in Constitution points the other way, but uniform registration has not committing the crime and being they argue. been found to be a restraint or to convicted in the first place, not the Criminal convictions are the affect liberty interests. It is like result of State notification and result of a public trial. There are registering to vote or registering a dissemination of public information certain constitutional guarantees car. Offenders contend that, as a about the crime and the conviction. associated with the public trial for result of community notification, Third, the States and the Federal both the accused and for the public. they will be shunned and avoided government argue that the laws are But there is no constitutional and denied jobs and places to live. not intended to operate against or to provision that guarantees a That is not a State-imposed punish, ridicule or instigate illegal convicted offender the right to restraint on liberty because these acts against the offender. Illegal conceal or erase the fact of his things are not requirements of or acts actually are quite rare and conviction or the facts of the crime, the intent of notification laws. To

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 51 the extent that such things even appeal courts. Two cases involve Constitution questions will be the occur, they are the normal societal the Washington and New Jersey most influential. Depending on consequences of committing a community notification laws, both what decisions are reached, this heinous crime. of which were upheld by State issue may well end up before the In fact, numerous cases, starting supreme courts and lower Federal U.S. Supreme Court. with a 1976 Supreme Court case,3 courts. The other two involve a have held that simply labeling a New York community notification Hendricks case issues person a “criminal” or making law and a Connecticut probation Earlier, I mentioned the statements that a person committed office community notification Supreme Court’s recent decision in a particular crime does not infringe policy, both of which were struck the Hendricks case. The Supreme on a constitutional right, even if the down by lower Federal courts.4 Court just last month upheld a information is not true and even if Hopefully, decisions in these portion of Kansas’ Sexually third parties rely on the information four cases will clarify the standards Violent Predator Act which to refuse to employ or rent a to be applied in these cases and the provided for the involuntary civil residence to that person. constitutionality of community commitment of sexually violent Finally, as with the privacy notification laws in general. Until predators who finished serving claim, even if there were a now, there have been many cases in their criminal sentence but were constitutional liberty interest State courts and in lower Federal determined to be likely to strike involved, there would be a courts dealing with Federal again. This is not a community balancing test. One would balance constitutional questions, but notification case, obviously, but it public interest against the decisions have been a mixed bag. does have some import to the cases offender’s interest. Meeting the due Cases on appeal resulted in split we are interested in today. The process requirements of the decisions for notification laws. The court held that the civil Constitution can be very minimal. Supreme Courts of Washington commitment law was a valid It could constitute a notice to the State and New Jersey upheld sex remedial law and was not criminal offender informing him that offender notification laws; punishment, even though it meant notification is going to take place Massachusetts’ highest court that these people could be confined and giving him the right to present approved that State’s community to a secure psychiatric facility objections. notification law in an advisory indefinitely or for the rest of their These offenders have been opinion. The Kansas Supreme lives. convicted of violent sex offenses. Court struck down the Kansas There are several issues in this There is a proven statistical notification law last year. There are case that are helpful for our correlation between sex offense cases pending in a variety of other purposes. First, if the Supreme convictions and future likelihood to States. The cases become Court can uphold as valid and non- commit sex crimes. The State has a especially confusing when you punitive the potential lifetime very strong interest in protecting consider that we are dealing with incarceration of sex offenders children and other potential victims very different, specific laws in each based on a prediction of future from these crimes. On the other State. dangerousness, it is hard to imagine hand, the offender’s right to The offenders who challenge the that the Court would have a conceal his public record laws also come from different problem with laws that simply information is minimal, assuming it positions. Some were convicted or provide public record information even exists. Minimal due process committed their crimes before the on sex offenders who are at large in procedures may very well be notification law was passed. Others the community. We believe that, enough, even if there is a due committed their crimes after the after Hendricks, courts should have process claim in the first place. law passed. They are placed in no trouble finding community different situations and make notification laws to be non- Pending litigation slightly different claims, although punitive. Now that we better understand they use the same basic arguments Second, the court in the the issues raised by litigation, we we talked about earlier. Hendricks decision rejected should examine the current status The Federal appeal courts’ virtually every argument raised by of pending litigation. Right now, decisions on the Federal offenders who attack community decisions are expected any day in notification laws. They found that four cases pending in Federal the civil commitment law had a 4 The Second Circuit reversed the public safety purpose, that it was lower court in both instances. See not intended to exact retribution, 3 Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693 (1976). Footnote 1.

Page 52 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries and that the Court specifically Courts in general seem much approved the use of past criminal more likely to uphold community conduct to predict future danger. notification statutes that show a The Supreme Court also rejected clear reliance on a finding of public the argument that disagreement safety necessity and an attempt to among experts about whether sex tie notification to the public benefit. offenders can be rehabilitated When that is apparent in statutes should keep legislators from acting and methods used to determine on this matter. when to notify, how much to notify Finally, on a more legalistic and whom to notify, the courts note, the court clarified the seem more deferential to States and standard to be used for determining less likely to impose restrictions. whether something is criminal Conversely, where public safety punishment. The court ruled that concerns do not appear to be the you must first look at a law’s guiding factor, courts are more intent. Is the intent of the law likely to be open to considering the punitive or is it for public safety? If harm to the offender and are less the legislature’s intent is not inclined to uphold the laws. For punitive, the law would be example, the Kansas Supreme presumed valid unless the sex Court struck down the Kansas offender can show by clearest proof notification statute last year that its purpose or effect is, in fact, because it provided open access to so punitive as to negate the intent. sex offender registries, listed all That is a very hard standard to persons convicted of “sexually meet. motivated crimes,” and made the I mentioned that the four information available to anyone currently pending cases should with no warning, no finding of probably apply that standard. We public safety necessity, and no believe it is the appropriate limits on its use. standard to determining whether Kansas seems to be at one end community notification laws are of the spectrum in terms of what valid. One Federal district court in they do with notification. Other New Jersey already applied the States like New Jersey, Washington Hendricks standard to uphold New and New York have tiers of Jersey’s community notification offenders, formalized assessments law against a challenge from of likelihood to re-offend, and offenders who actually committed procedures for determining when crimes after the law’s effective and how to notify. New Jersey also date. That is an unpublished provides extensive procedures for opinion, but we still think it is quite judicial review prior to notification. informative. That is a matter of New Jersey That brings me to my last point. State law and would not necessarily If you take anything from what I carry over to other States. It was have talked about today, you not found to be a Federal should take this: The most constitutional requirement; it was a important thread running through New Jersey State law requirement. the litigation is the issue of public At this point, it is impossible to safety. It shows up time and time tell whether one type of notification again in how the courts view law is more likely to survive community notification laws. In constitutional challenge than any fact, the Federal law dealing with other. Hopefully this notification notification mandates the States to issue will become a bit clearer in provide notification when there is a the near future. public safety need.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 53 Status of Federal legislation on sex offenders and changes to current laws

ROBERT R. BELAIR General Counsel SEARCH

I am going to be very brief On the other side, Rep. Second, they follow procedures today, because I am going to talk McCollum is chairman of the outlined in the proposed U.S. about new Federal legislation to House Subcommittee on Crime. He Department of Justice guidelines amend the Jacob Wetterling Act, is a very powerful and influential relating to military and Federal sex legislation which is fairly member of the Judiciary offenders. If they do become law, straightforward. Committee. Sen. Gregg and Rep. they will assure that State House Resolution 1683 was McCollum are the right sponsors registration systems identify and recently introduced by Rep. Bill for this legislation. New Hampshire track Federal and military sex McCollum. The bill has already had problems with its registration offenders. That is probably the been reported out of his Crime and notification laws, so the State biggest, most important change Subcommittee, and a hearing on the went to Sen. Gregg. Florida had these laws would bring. bill is expected soon by the full problems, so it went to Rep. (The guidelines encourage the House Judiciary Committee.1 McCollum. Texas has had States to keep track of military and A companion bill, Senate Bill problems, as have a number of Federal sex offenders. These bills 767, was introduced by Sen. Judd other States. require that those offenders report Gregg, chairman of the I have noticed during my 20- through the military or through the Appropriations Subcommittee on plus years as a legislative lawyer Federal correctional prison Commerce, Justice and State. The that it is always very important for agencies. They do not require the bill was attached last week to Sen. a bill’s prospects when there is no State registration systems to keep Gregg’s appropriations bill, which opposition. That is an inside tip. track of them, but the momentum surprised a great many of us. I am There is, to my knowledge, no seems to be pointing in that told by Sen. Gregg’s staff that they opposition at this point to these direction.) intend to take the legislation bills. I think the bills are going to Third, the bills improve through to the full Senate become law. The Senate passed registration and tracking of sex Appropriations Committee, and on similar legislation during the 104th offenders who live in one State but through to the Senate floor.2 Congress. I think the means by who work or go to school in which that legislation becomes law another State. That is part of the are still up in the air. I do believe law now. It is addressed in the 1 H.R. 1683, titled the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually the current bills will become law. guidelines as well for clarity, but Violent Offenders Registration the bills provide further Improvement Act of 1997, was Four major purposes clarification. The bills define introduced May 20, 1997, by U.S. Rep. There are four major purposes to “employment” and “going to Bill McCollum (R-Florida). The these bills. school.” To some extent, I think resolution amends the Violent Crime First, they enhance flexibility for you can say they improve the Control and Law Enforcement Act of State registration systems, allowing congruence between State and 1994 to clarify certain portions relating registration reporting to be done Federal registration or database to sex offender registration concurrently. They provide programs. They certainly give the requirements. The House passed H.R. flexibility in address verification, States a little bit more flexibility in 1683 on Sept. 23, 1997, and sent it to the Senate. relaxing slightly some of the the reporting. They do not 2 deadlines for offenders to report otherwise amend the Lychner Act S.B. 767 carries the same title as H.R. when they leave prison, although or provide some of the remedies 1683, and was introduced by U.S. Sen. Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire) on the they still use the word “prompt.” that the FBI indicated eventually same day. It was referred to the Senate may be necessary, maybe sooner Judiciary Committee. It amends the Enforcement Act of 1994 in the same than later. Violent Crime Control and Law manner as H.R. 1683.

Page 54 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Another important purpose of I do not believe the military has There are a couple of other the legislation is to help States do a commented on this legislation. I provisions I did not mention. The better job keeping track of cannot imagine that it would be bill would prohibit the sale or probationers and parolees who are opposed to this requirement. On the exchange of sex offender sex offenders. The bills hope to do other hand, those of us who have information for profit. I think we this — and this is very important looked at the three military systems are all aware of the various kinds of — without requiring yet another — one used by the Navy and services on the Internet and others round of State law. Obviously, Marines, another by the Army and that harvest public record through the Wetterling Act, the third by the Air Force — know information, court records and Megan’s Law and the Lychner Act, that those systems do compare to other types of public record there has been a fair amount of the kinds of systems in terms of information, and make those pressure on the State legislatures. capability, accuracy and records available for profit. These completeness that are now bills would prohibit that. Specific changes available on the adult civilian side. They also have provisions for The bills will initiate specific I should add that even though these dealing with the registration of changes. One has to do with the bills are fairly far along in the State probationers and parolees, controversial issue of sexually legislative process, they are still and they amend penalty provisions violent predator determinations. very much works in progress. to permit extradition in cases These bills would allow the Concurrent registration is involving parolees or probationers Attorney General to waive the State addressed in the pending who move to different States and board requirement, provided that legislation, which also provides then fail to register. there is an adequate process in more flexibility in how registration place. They do provide a bit more can occur. Address verification, flexibility in this area. which has been a big issue, is The bills also give States more addressed very effectively in the flexibility in advising offenders of guidelines and is further addressed their registration duties and in the bills. An individual required obtaining initial registration to register as a sex offender could information to report. At present, use a walk-in system to return an these tasks must be performed by a address verification form rather court or by a State prison official. than mailing it in. This legislation would allow The bills use the term designated State agencies, the court “promptly,” as opposed to the or other responsible officials to existing laws, which prescribe set carry out those duties. Again, some periods of time for offenders to of these concerns and issues were register once released from prison. addressed by the guidelines. They extend law enforcement As I mentioned, Federal and immunity provisions to good-faith military offender reporting is the conduct if a particular agency biggest issue. The bills bring them assigns related work to an under the law. That has always independent contractor. In an era been the spirit of the original law, of increased outsourcing and but there has been a gap. These privatization, that is obviously very bills would require the Secretary of important. Defense to establish a registration and notification system similar to the one used by the States. For those of us who have long watched and worked on information system issues, it is going to be fascinating to see whether the military can respond to this requirement in an effective way.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 55 Panel of the States: Systems for the registration of sex offenders

Review of the New York State Sex Offender Registration Act Floyd Epps The method of risk assessment used for the New York State Sex Offender Registration Act Kathy J. Canestrini California’s history of sex offender registration requirements and response to new Federal mandates Doug Smith The Florida sex offender registration and notification system Donna M. Uzzell The Illinois registration and notification system for sex offenders Kirk Lonbom Development of the Illinois sex offender registration and community notification program Mike Welter Review of the New York State Sex Offender Registration Act

FLOYD EPPS Member, Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders State of New York

Ms. Kathy Canestrini and I are members of the board. The board’s no other information can be going to discuss certain aspects of role, as defined by the statute, is to given out on the offender. the New York State Sex Offender develop guidelines and procedures • Level 2 offenders are required Registration Act.1 Specifically, we to assess risk levels based on two to register for a period of 10 are going to discuss our risk factors: the likelihood of reoffense years, and we can release more assessment process and the role of and the threat the offender poses to information about the offender the State’s Board of Examiners of the public if he reoffends. The to the public — such as the Sex Offenders. Board of Examiners is responsible crime of conviction, his modus The following is some for reviewing and making risk-level operandi and the targeted background information about the recommendations for all offenders victims. The only information New York State Sex Offender being released from prisons and we cannot release on a Level 2 Registration Act. In July 1995, the local jails. offender is his exact address. New York State Legislature passed, There are currently more than • Level 3, or high-risk, offenders and Gov. George Pataki signed into 5,000 offenders in the New York are required to register law, the New York State Sex State Registry. The board assisted annually for a minimum of 10 Offender Registration Act, more in assessing the retro-pool of years and, possibly, for life. commonly known in the New York offenders. Included in the retro- These offenders are required to area as “Megan’s Law.” pool are offenders who were on register with local police every The law, which became parole or probation on January 21, 90 days. All information on effective January 21, 1996, is 1996. The board’s main objective Level 3 offenders, including consistent with the Jacob is to review cases of offenders exact address, can be Wetterling Act, including the released from State corrections and distributed to the public. requirement for sex offenders to local jails. We assess those cases The Sex Offender Registration register and to provide information on a continuous basis. Act created three procedures for about themselves to the State. It There are three levels of risk in informing the public of the also provides that a Board of New York. Level 1 is the lowest presence of sex offenders in the Examiners of Sex Offenders be and Level 3 is the highest. Ms. community. One, it authorized established. The board’s primary Canestrini will discuss how we local law enforcement to dispense function is to provide the determine risk levels. I am going to information. Two, it established a sentencing court with a give you the floor plan of what we 900-prefix number the public can recommended level of risk that an do, and she is going to build the telephone to inquire whether a sex offender poses to the public. house, so you will see and offender is listed in the registry. On January 21, 1996, Gov. understand the process very clearly. Three, it called for the distribution Pataki officially appointed a five- Risk level is used in New York of a high-risk offender subdirectory member Board of Examiners of to determine the frequency and to law enforcement agencies. Sex Offenders. Board members are duration of registration and the The Board of Examiners’ review experienced in the fields of amount of community notification process begins approximately 120 treatment, supervision, research that can be provided to the public. days prior to the offender’s release and the prosecution of sex The levels are as follows: from incarceration. The offender’s offenders. Ms. Canestrini and I are • A Level 1 offender is required case record is forwarded to the to register annually for a board at that time. The case record 1 S. 11-B, 218th Legislature of the period of 10 years. The only includes all relevant information State of New York (Chapter 192 of information we dispense on a concerning the presentence the Laws of 1995). Signed by the Level 1 offender is affirmation investigation, the offender’s governor July 25, 1995. Effective that he is listed in the registry; criminal history or rap sheet, an January 21, 1996. institution summary and a

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 59 statement from the offender’s victim(s). There are times the board solicits additional information from the court, probation departments, parole officers, district attorney’s offices, State police, local police, and any other division or department that will enable us to provide the most thorough risk assessment possible to the sentencing court. According to the statute, each case must be reviewed by three board members, and each review is conducted independently of the other reviewers. When we come to a risk-level consensus, the primary or first reviewer is responsible for preparing a case summary supporting the assessment we provide to the court. Within 60 days of the offender’s release, the assessment recommendation is forwarded to the sentencing court with the summary that sustains the number of points we assess to this sex offender, including all information we obtained in order to do our risk assessment. To date, the courts have sustained the board’s recommendation in more than 85 percent of our cases. Thirty days prior to the offender’s release, the court notifies and provides the offender the opportunity to be heard. The court also notifies and advises the offender of his and all of his other rights. Finally, after completion of this entire process, the offender is informed of his registration responsibilities and obligations just prior to being released. This has been a brief synopsis of everything we do. It is our floor plan and blueprint. Ms. Canestrini will discuss the specifics of the statistics we have concerning our risk assessment process.

Page 60 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries The method of risk assessment used for the New York State Sex Offender Registration Act

KATHY CANESTRINI Member, Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders State of New York

With the passage of the New 1996, through June 13, 1997, the the offense we are currently York State Sex Offender board has reviewed 1,540 cases. reviewing. Registration Act in 1995, the State We typically review approximately Injury or Death. The second of New York adopted an individual 100 cases per month. override factor is if the offender review process for determining sex Slightly more than half of the inflicted serious physical injury or offender risk levels, as opposed to 1,540 offenders, or 52 percent of caused the victim’s death. (I using a “per se” rule in which the the cases reviewed by the board, consistently refer to offenders as conviction crime determines a resulted in a Level 3 risk men because women constitute less person’s risk level. The Act assessment, the highest level of risk than 1 percent of our offenders.) specified that a number items for committing another sex offense. Threats. The third override should be considered in the risk Thirty-nine percent of the factor is if the offender made recent assessment process. assessments resulted in a Level 2 threats that he will commit another The Board of Examiners of Sex recommendation, or that of sexual or violent crime. Offenders elected to develop an moderate risk. The remaining 9 Offender Abnormality. The objective instrument and associated percent of the cases resulted in a fourth override factor is if a clinical guidelines to measure risk using Level 1 recommendation, or the assessment determined that the these specified factors. The risk lowest level of risk. The board offender has a psychological, assessment instrument and arrives at the risk-level physical or organic abnormality guidelines were developed under recommendations by applying the that interferes with his ability to the direction of Mr. Paul risk assessment instrument and control impulsive sexual behavior. Shechtman, former director of associated guidelines. To date, the board has only used criminal justice services in New The risk assessment instrument the first two override categories. York State, and with the assistance covers four basic categories: Of the 1,540 cases we have of Ms. Kim English, Director of current offense, criminal history, reviewed to date, 9 percent resulted Research, Division of Criminal post-offense behavior and release in a Level 3 risk assessment based Justice, Colorado Department of environment. The board utilizes a on override factors. In the Public Safety. numeric scoring system that takes a remaining 90 percent of the cases, The New York State Board of number of factors into account. we used a risk assessment scoring Examiners of Sex Offenders, There is also an “override” system in which we considered a created by our State’s sex offender category that allows the board to number of individual items registration act, is primarily abandon the numeric system in reported in academic literature as responsible for reviewing the cases certain instances, and a “departure” predictive of sexual reoffending or of persons released from State section that takes mitigating factors dangerousness. incarceration or from definite local into consideration. I would like to Each individual item in the terms after serving time for sex discuss the override category first. numeric scoring system is added offenses.1 From the time the act together to produce an aggregate was implemented on January 21, Override factors total score ranging from 0 to 300 The assessment instrument points. A score of 0 to 70 points considers four factors that override results in a presumptive 1 S. 11-B, 218th Legislature of the the numeric system and result in an recommendation for the offender of State of New York (Chapter 192 of automatic Level 3 risk designation. Risk-level 1. A score of 75 to 105 the Laws of 1995). Signed by the Prior Felony Convictions. The points results in a Risk-level 2 governor July 25, 1995. Effective first override factor is if the recommendation. A score of 110 to January 21, 1996. offender had a prior felony 300 points results in a Risk-level 3 conviction for a sex crime prior to recommendation.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 61 Scoring system categories offense. Approximately 20 percent relationship was promoted for the The scoring system covers four of the reviewed cases involved primary purpose of victimization. general categories. The first looks multiple victims in the current In this category, we also consider at the current offense and considers crime being reviewed by the board. whether a professional relationship various factors which describe the When there are multiple victims, was used to gain access and to nature of the current crime. The the victims are almost always abuse the victim, for example by a second category looks at the children. teacher, a priest or a doctor. offender’s criminal history. The Frequency. The fourth item we Thirty-five percent of the third category looks at his post- consider is the frequency of the offenders were scored under this offense behavior. The final general sexual misconduct. Did it happen category primarily as strangers to category looks at the release on more than one occasion? the victim. I should emphasize that environment. Twenty points are assessed if there 65 percent of the offenders were is evidence of a continuing course not scored under this category, — Current offense of sexual assault against the victim. which obviously indicates that most Under the first general category Approximately one-third of the victims knew their offenders. of current offense, we consider cases involved more than one seven specific items. sexual assault, and some of the — Criminal history Violence. The first is the use of crimes involved abuses that The second general category of violence during the commission of occurred over a period of several the risk assessment instrument is the crime. Ten points are assessed years. Again, when this item is criminal history, which examines if the offender used forcible scored, the victims are almost the age at which the offender compulsion during offense, and 15 always children. committed his first sex crime, his points are assigned if the offender Victim Age. The fifth category prior criminal history, his most inflicted physical injury. Thirty looks at the age of the victim or recent commission of a felony points are assigned if the offender victims. Twenty points are assessed offense prior to his current was armed with a weapon during if the victim is between the ages of conviction, and his substance abuse the crime. To date, approximately 11 and 16. Thirty points are history. 20 percent of the offenses involve assessed if the victim is age 10 or Age at First Offense. Ten the use of a weapon. When a younger or older than age 62. points are assessed if the offender weapon was used, the victim was Victims’ ages have ranged from a was convicted or adjudicated of his almost always an adult. low of just a few days old to a high first sexual crime before he reached Intrusiveness of Contact. The of 85 years old. Sixty-five percent age 21. Approximately one-quarter second item we consider is the of the victims were under age 17, of our population falls into this intrusiveness of the sexual contact. and 35 percent were age 10 or category. Five points are assessed if the younger. This is consistent with Prior Criminal History. The contact occurred over clothing. Ten most of the information we have next focus area is prior criminal points are assessed if the contact been presented with at this convictions or adjudications. Thirty was under clothing. Twenty-five conference. points are assessed if there was a points are assessed if the sexual Victim Helplessness. In item prior misdemeanor sex crime contact involved intercourse, six, 20 points are assessed if the conviction, a prior charge of sodomy or aggravated sexual victim was either physically or endangering the welfare of a child, abuse. Eight out of every 10 cases mentally helpless. This would or a prior violent felony offense. the board has reviewed involved include unconsciousness due to Fifteen points are assessed for a vaginal intercourse, oral sodomy, alcohol consumption or sleep or if nonviolent felony, and five points anal sodomy, or aggravated sexual the victim was physically helpless, are assessed for a nonsexual abuse which requires a standard of for example, by confinement to a misdemeanor conviction. Using physical injury. wheelchair. Only 5 percent of the this category and the information Multiple Victims. The third offenders have been scored under gained from the override category, item we consider is evidence of this category. a striking 31 percent of offenders multiple victims in the crime. Zero Relationship. The seventh had prior convictions for sex points are assessed if there is one specific item we consider is the crimes or violent felony offenses. victim. Twenty points are assessed relationship between the offender We score 10 points if the if there were 2 victims, and 30 and the victim. Twenty points are previous sexual crime or felony points are assessed if there were 3 assessed if the offender was a conviction occurred within 3 years or more victims involved in the stranger to the victim or if the of the current conviction. If the

Page 62 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries offender was incarcerated for a materials to a staff person. To date, To date, the board has only portion of the previous 3 years, we 20 percent of the offenders were departed in about 11 percent of the do not consider that period during assessed as having a serious cases. These departures have been our examination of his history. disciplinary infraction, and another distributed equally between raising Approximately one-quarter of the 5 percent committed sexual or lowering the assessment level. offenders had a prior felony or sex misbehavior. We provide justification to the crime conviction within 3 years of court when we do depart. perpetrating the current offense. — Release environment Typically, an item not already Substance Abuse History. The final general category we considered by the assessment Drug and alcohol use is highly consider is release environment. instrument justifies the departure. It associated with sexual offending. Two factors are taken into account can be a mitigating factor, such as a We score 15 points if an offender in this category. We examine the victim’s lack of consent based has either a substance abuse history supervision the offender is going to solely on inability to consent or if he was using drugs or alcohol receive and the living and because of the victim’s age, or it at the time of the current offense. employment situations that await can be a recognition that the Six out of every 10 of our offenders him. The board focuses on the offender has made exceptional fell within this category. supervision category because, when progress and has participated in a we are conducting our review, the treatment program. Aggravating — Post-offense behavior living and employment situations factors include multiple convictions The next general item on the are typically not established. for prior misdemeanor sex crimes risk assessment instrument looks at Zero points are assessed if the or the use of pornography or sexual post-offense behavior. We consider offender is released to a specialized devices that were not captured by two different factors under this parole caseload. Five points are the assessment instrument. category. First, we examine the assessed if he is released to parole I would like to end with a quote offender’s acceptance of supervision without the benefit of a that I came across recently. I responsibility. Second, we look at specialized caseload. Fifteen points thought it was very striking, the offender’s conduct while are assessed if the offender reached primarily because it was written 50 confined or supervised. the maximum expiration date of his years ago. “The most rapidly Offenders who deny, minimize sentence and he was being released increasing type of crime is that or mitigate their behavior are poor into the community without perpetrated by degenerate sex prospects for rehabilitation. Ten supervision. Approximately 65 offenders. Latest figures show that points are assigned if they fall into percent of our offenders are while the number of crimes is this category. Fifteen points are released to a specialized parole diminishing, the number of sex assigned if the offender refuses caseload. It is noteworthy that 11 crimes continues to increase.” That treatment or if he has been expelled percent of our offenders are was a quote from the FBI director from treatment. To date, released at their maximum sentence cited in American Magazine in approximately one-third of our expiration date into the community 1947. offenders were either removed with no supervision. from a treatment program or refused to participate in a sex Departure section offender program. I spoke previously about a The second specific issue in this departure section in our risk general category is conduct while assessment instrument. This section confined. Ten points are assessed if is premised on the recognition that an incarcerated offender has an objective instrument, no matter incurred a serious disciplinary how well designed, will not fully infraction while incarcerated. This capture the nuances of every case. would include such offenses as After the presumptive risk level assaulting a guard or another is determined based on the scoring inmate or possessing drugs or a system, the case is reviewed to weapon. Twenty points are determine if a departure is assessed if there was a sexual warranted. A departure can send misconduct offense, such as the risk-level assessment either to a sexually assaulting another inmate higher or lower level. or writing sexually suggestive

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 63 California’s history of sex offender registration requirements and response to new Federal mandates

DOUG SMITH Chief, Bureau of Criminal Information and Analysis California Department of Justice

I would like to review the Registration improvements via the California Law history of California’s sex offender The Attorney General Enforcement Telecommunica- registration requirements and our established an enforcement arm of tions Systems (CLETS). State’s response to recent Federal the Sexual • Sexual Predator Apprehension mandates requiring States to Program under the Thompson- Teams were established in San strengthen their laws dealing with Presley Violent Crime Information, Francisco, Fresno and Los sex offenders. Investigation and Technology Act Angeles. The teams augmented of 1994.2 The Attorney General the Behavioral Profiler Section History also established a computer system of the California Department California enacted a registration to enable law enforcement officers of Justice. requirement for convicted sex throughout the State — from street • Supervised Release Files were offenders in 1947.1 The number of patrol to detectives — to share activated on-line with CLETS, sex offenses that resulted in a critical information about known making it possible for a patrol registration requirement generally offenders and unsolved crimes. officer to determine an expanded over the years, but the Funding and policy direction individual’s release status actual registration and record- provided by the Technology Act when checking for “wants and keeping processes remained about resulted in the following warrants.” the same. accomplishments: A notable change occurred in • The Nation’s first automated 1986 when juveniles were included system for DNA and RFLP in the registration requirements, analysis was created. although their registration process California took the lead in is somewhat different than that developing the next generation used for adults. Generally speaking, of genetic markers for law convicted adult sex offenders must enforcement. To date, more information on career criminals, register for life. than 34,000 convicted offender parolees, probationers, people missing Offenses requiring registration samples have been analyzed under suspicious circumstances, are consistent with Federal and entered into the data bank. registered and habitual sex offenders, requirements. The number of • The records of 65,000 sex registered arsonists and violent offenders. A specialized crime analysis individuals required to register offender records were unit provides VCIN information from grew steadily for the first 40 years reviewed and updated. the investigation of unsolved, violent to about 70,000. More than 10,000 • Sex offender and arsonist crimes. With one call, an investigator subjects were then purged when registration information was can reach specialists who access the two — lewd conduct made accessible to local law network. VCIN will eventually be and indecent exposure — were enforcement authorities available to investigators at their own reclassified as nonregisterable through the Violent Crime workstations. In Phase I of VCIN, offenses. The renewed focus on sex Information Network (VCIN)3 missing-person case files are provided; offenders in the 1990s has pushed the California Department of Justice the number of individuals required has the ability to scan, store and retrieve photographs; sex and arson 2 st to register above 75,000. Statutes of 1993-94, 1 Ex. Sess., C.6 offender and supervised release (S.B. 12). information are available via CLETS; 3 The VCIN provides a communication and sex and arson offender registration doorway for State and local law and supervised release information is 1 Statutes of 1947, c. 1124 enforcement. VCIN contains available through the network.

Page 64 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries • The driver license and vehicle as sex offenders. The volume of Inquiries have been made on registration files of sex new registrants is approximately 13,100 subjects during the offender registrants were 3,000 per year. Ninety-nine percent identification line’s 2 years of flagged to keep authorities of those required to register are operation. About 1,000 of these informed of address changes, male. This equates to about 1 in have been identified as registered vehicle information and every 150 adult males in California. sex offenders. Based on personal data. Juveniles comprise only about 1 information provided by callers, percent of the sex offender file. these thousand registrants had Registration updates, To meet the requirements of our access to more than 100,000 inquiries State’s Megan’s Law, we have children and adults. While the Historically, sex offender designated 1,617 of these offenders estimate of the number of registration has been a fingerprint- as “high-risk” and 62,303 as individuals at risk is not carefully based manual record process “serious offenders.” The names of defined, controlled or verified, the initiated by the local law these individuals and other magnitude cannot be ignored. The enforcement agency with pertinent data about them are public exposure is staggering at jurisdiction over the registrant’s included in the CD-ROM and fall half or even a quarter of the place of residence. Address into the proactive notification number of people believed changes and other updates were categories for law enforcement exposed. submitted to the California agencies. Department of Justice (DOJ) for The 13,000 registrants not ‘Megan’s Law’ activity central record maintenance. VCIN subject to Megan’s Law The California version of implementation made the process requirements are included in our Megan’s Law took effect in much faster and less redundant. “other” category, which includes September 1996.4 All components VCIN provides more useful and those convicted of indecent of the law are now in place current information. Local law exposure, spousal rape and throughout the State. The most enforcement agencies can enter possession of illegal pornography. visible feature —and in some ways information directly into VCIN. Approximately 7,000 of the 77,000 the easiest to implement — is the The DOJ still conducts fingerprint offenders who are required to availability of the CD-ROM comparisons and continues to register have never registered. In containing information on serious centralize verification of addition, we estimate that the and high-risk offenders. Since July registration requirements, but initial address information on currently 1, 1997, members of the public can entry and updates can be done registered sex offenders is about 75 visit their local sheriff’s office and remotely. percent accurate. We presume many police departments VCIN can provide information some of the subjects are deceased. throughout the State to view a CD- about registrants when routine Exposure provided by the Megan’s ROM computer disk that lists inquiries are made. More Law CD-ROM will improve the approximately 64,000 registered importantly, an inquiry into the information we currently have sex offenders in California. Wanted Persons System (WPS) available. This information is available at automatically connects to the California DOJ activated the approximately 400 locations. The Supervised Release File (SRF) Child Molester Identification Line CD-ROMs are updated four times where the sex registrations are in July 1995. Through a 900-prefix annually. Searches can be filed. The individual making the telephone number at a cost of $10 conducted by name, county or ZIP inquiry is provided with or by mail-in request at a cost of code. Approximately one-half of information on the registration $4, the public can check whether the entries include a photo of the requirement along with any suspected individuals are a threat to sex offender. More photos will be warrants, probation, parole or their safety or their children’s included in future editions. violent criminal notification. safety. In addition, a hard copy Megan’s Law requires Contact information can be noted binder of 892 high-risk offenders California to maintain a list of its in the file, which also works to was distributed in 1996 to law 1,600-plus high-risk, “worst-of-the- track notification in response to enforcement agencies across the worst” offenders. More than 80 Megan’s Law. state. In 1997, the identification percent of these high-risk offenders line was expanded to cover all the have their photos included on the Current data subjects who fall within the CD-ROM. (This CD-ROM replaces Today, more than 77,000 Megan’s Law notification Californians are required to register parameters. 4 Statutes of 1996, c. 908 (AB 1562).

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 65 the Child Molester Identification name, physical description, county Department of Education to explore Line Subdirectory distributed to of residence, ZIP code, the offense the best methods of protecting the law enforcement agencies in or offenses that lead to the school-age population and staff January 1996.) registration requirement and a through a combination of criminal In addition to giving law- photo, if available. history checks, Megan’s Law abiding citizens the resources to We expect to improve the photo notifications, and proactive law inquire about registered sex availability and quality because enforcement and community offenders, Megan’s Law also initial registration and annual involvement. The schools also play equips law enforcement with three updates submitted to VCIN now a major role in public notification. different methods to notify the require that photos be included. As mentioned earlier, we have public if it is under potential threat This same CD-ROM has a law an ongoing problem locating some by a registered serious sex enforcement access feature that registrants. A national registration offender. Law enforcement lacked allows agencies to obtain file will help as individuals move these options prior to Megan’s information on all registrants, across State lines and are required Law. The options are: including those listed in the “other” to continue to meet basic 1. While on patrol, an officer category. Additional information is registration requirements. A may notify individuals whom included, such as specific street proposal currently before the the officer deems at risk that address, along with the ability to California Legislature would they are in proximity to a search by additional elements and require regular, biometric registered serious sex offender. to create lineup cards and posters. identification-based location For example, if an officer A task force representing police verification for high-risk offenders contacts an individual near a chiefs, sheriffs, peace officers and on a daily, weekly or monthly playground and determines the DOJ developed model basis. Individuals could also be that he is a registered serious guidelines for consideration by required to confirm their location offender, the officer can then each agency. Numerous training by telephone using a system tell parents in that park that seminars were held throughout the currently used in some parole and their children are playing near State. In addition, the State probation supervision efforts. The a registered serious sex Commission on Peace Officer telephone number would be pre- offender. Standards and Training produced established for location and a voice 2. Local police may also warn and distributed a law enforcement print match would provide the residents, schools, churches or training video that was telecast via biometric identification. any other community members satellite. Since local police are best Public reaction to new sex at risk that a registered serious positioned to determine what level offender information provided by sex offender resides nearby. and method of notification is notification via direct access or by Officers distributing fliers appropriate for their community, proactive law enforcement is not door-to-door with information the specifics of implementation are clear at this time. The level of about the individual typically local policy matters. However, public interest and concern and accomplish this type of most agencies in regional areas how this interest is expressed will notification. realize that their approaches should dictate the impact of the new laws. 3. The final notification method be consistent with one another. California’s laws and programs applies to the high-risk are intended for public protection offenders. When an offender’s Pending issues and awareness. In announcing the name is on the “worst-of-the- We feel we are very close to availability of the Megan’s Law worst” list, local police complete compliance with the CD-ROM, California Attorney officials may advertise his Jacob Wetterling Act as amended General Dan Lungren stated, identity and whereabouts in by Megan’s Law. Legislation is “Critics of Megan’s Law argue that any manner they see fit to pending before the California public awareness of these convicted warn the community they Legislature to provide minor sex offenders constitutes cruel and protect and serve. clarifications. unusual punishment. The purpose Media interest in the sex Schools have taken a great of Megan’s Law is not to further offenders’ CD-ROM has been high interest in how Megan’s Law punish convicted sex offenders, but since its release. Public interest, affects their operations, both in rather to empower law-abiding while not overwhelming, appears to terms of responsibilities and members of the public with be increasing. Information provided benefits. We are working directly information they can use to protect to the public includes a registrant’s with the schools and the State

Page 66 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries themselves, their families and their neighbors.”

Cooperative efforts It was not easy for California to take the steps it did to respond to new sex offender mandates. As you can see, our system is not perfect. However, our response has been a good example of cooperation between many levels of government and how the cooperation can result in major achievements. We brought together the considerable resources of law enforcement agencies, local and State legal staff, the State legislature, the private business sector and the general public to mold an effective program for using information and resources to protect the public.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 67 The Florida sex offender registration and notification system

DONNA M. UZZELL Director, Criminal Justice Information Systems Florida Department of Law Enforcement

I have listened to representatives greatly expands our sexual predator Under our old law, when we had of the Federal government describe program to include other categories a stricter interpretation of the term their frustration in trying to of sex offenders. The Act becomes “sex predator” based on the incorporate the changes in effective on October 1, 1997. commission of the offense, we only registration and notification laws Florida courts designate had 300 to 400 people in our mandated by recent legislation. I individuals as sexual predators registry. As of October 1, 1997, am reminded of a story about a based on statutory criteria. Those with the expansion of the law to gentleman stopped on a Florida designated have, generally, been include sex offenders who have highway by a law enforcement convicted of first-degree felonies or committed a broader range of officer. The officer steps up to the capital felony offenses. Individuals offenses, there will be 10,000 gentleman’s vehicle and asks, “Can convicted of second-degree offenders in the community under I please see your driver’s license?” felonies may also be designated as supervision and 7,000 who will be The gentleman glares at the sexual predators if they were incarcerated as of that date. We are officer, grits his teeth and responds, convicted of other sex offenses authorized by law to charge a “Can’t you people please get within the past 10 years. reasonable fee to provide written organized?” The officer is taken Florida’s sexual predator information to persons who request aback. The gentleman then says to statutes require the chief of police photos of offenders via the toll-free the officer, “You stopped me and the sheriff to notify a line. One helpful aspect of the yesterday and took my license community of a sexual predator’s Public Safety Information Act is away. You stop me today and ask presence. Changes made to the that it requires the FDLE to place me for it. Can’t you people please registration and notification law by sexual predators’ photos and get organized?” the State Legislature in 1997 allow information on the Internet, so not I sometimes wonder if that is notification to be conducted in a everyone will have to obtain sex what some folks say about us and manner deemed appropriate. The offender information over the our Federal partners in our State. law also requires the Florida telephone.3 Will you people please get Department of Law Enforcement Florida is a “sunshine State.” organized and get these programs (FDLE) to develop a protocol on Florida’s records are “in the going? It has been a difficult task. tips for community notification. sunshine,” or open for public view. We produced that protocol in 1996. I hated that during my years in law Sexual predator notification We are expanding the protocol in enforcement. I am beginning to Florida initiated a program in 1997 to reflect the changes made love the “sunshine” laws now 1993 to register sexual predators. by the Legislature. because they help provide answers The program was changed in 1995 Other provisions of our law to questions about sex offenders. to add limited community require the FDLE to maintain a We just put the information out notification of a sexual predator’s toll-free telephone number to make there. Florida’s courts have ruled presence via newspaper ads. The information available on sexual we have the authority to do that. program was changed again in predators and sexual offenders.2 1996 to allow for more broad-based Florida does not require callers to The Internet: A new community notification. During the provide specific names. No one has information tool 1997 legislative session in Florida, to ask, “Is John Doe a sexual Florida’s Internet site is entered the Legislature passed the Public offender or sexual predator?” The through a World Wide Web page. Safety Information Act,1 which majority of callers ask if there are The Web page offers other sexual offenders in their counties. information about FDLE and includes a page on missing 1 H.B. 1029 (The Public Safety Information Act), approved by the 1997 Session of the Florida Legislature, 2 The toll-free number is 1-888-357- 3 The FDLE’s Web site address is: effective October 1, 1997. 7332, or 1-888-FL-PREDATOR. www.fdle.state.fl.us/.

Page 68 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries children. We think that is a very flyers directly from the Internet to photograph would be transmitted important feature. Users can also post for notification. The flyers list over our network and to the police “click on” or select the sexual the date the record was last officer’s desk or patrol car. An predators’ section of the Web site updated, the offender’s address and offender who fails to register or and obtain information that lets his modus operandi. report an address change could be them know about some important We asked our State Legislature arrested and charged with a third- qualifiers. to change the law because the degree felony. Positive identification is based previous notification procedure on a fingerprint comparison, and it identified victims in some custodial Registration processes is illegal to use this information in incest cases. We now report that a A court must make the sexual the commission of a crime. You victim was a minor, but we do not predator determination. When the can search for offenders on our give the victim’s age. determination is made, the court Web site by county, by city or by There has been tremendous clerk submits a fingerprint card, a the offender’s last name.4 interest in our Web site. Since photograph and the court finding to We are planning to create January 1, 1997, there have been the FDLE. The FDLE enters that separate categories for offenders more than 107,000 sex offender information into a sexual predator who are at large, for those who are inquiries on the site. (More than database, which we are now incarcerated, and for those who are 40,000 occurred during in the first developing. This database will have out-of-State. Offenders are 3 weeks following implementation historical information on address currently categorized by county. of the new sex offender laws.) changes, photographs and the Some counties with large Other provisions of the Florida offender’s modus operandi. This correctional facilities in their law require predators or offenders information is automatically jurisdictions have an inordinate to update their addresses with the uploaded into two very important amount of offenders listed on the Department of Highway Safety and sites — the Internet and the FCIC Internet, so we decided to create a Motor Vehicles. This will be telecommunications system. In the separate category for these. extremely important as the number latter, the information is placed in a We have 67 counties in Florida. of registered offenders increases. It “hot file” available to local law If you wanted information on is just too labor-intensive and cost- enforcement. offenders in Dade County, you prohibitive to conduct separate As part of the registration would enter “Dade County” into manual data entry of sex offender process, the State notifies any the appropriate area of the Web site information. Florida’s process uses criminal justice or law enforcement and find out that there are 63 an existing telecommunications agencies when predators move into registered sexual predators in the link with the Department of their jurisdictions. The offenders’ county. You can click on any one Highway Safety and Motor drivers’ licenses and vehicle tags of those predators to view a Vehicles information through are “flagged” in the Department of thumbnail sketch. For more which we electronically download Highway Safety and Motor information on the individual, you sex offender information. This Vehicles’ database. Thus, when an select another option that provides information updates our databases. officer makes a vehicle stop and the offender’s photograph in a flyer Each Florida county has an checks an offender’s driver’s format. Law enforcement agencies office of the Department of license or license plate, the officer interested in conducting a Highway Safety and Motor is informed that a sexual offender is notification procedure can print Vehicles which has the capability in his or her presence. This is how to take digitized photographs. our sexual predator registration Those photos will be transmitted to process works. 4 As of October 1, 1997, the FDLE us as well. By midsummer 1998, Because of changes made to Internet site allows sex offender the Florida Crime Information Florida’s law, there are some searches by ZIP code. The Web site has Center (FCIC) II — our version of differences in the way registration been the method most used by the public to obtain sex offender National Crime Information Center is conducted for sex offenders. The information. In the first 3 weeks that (NCIC) 2000 — will be up and Department of Corrections, which sex offender information was available, running. A local law enforcement includes probation and parole FDLE staff responded to more than 900 officer conducting a criminal officers, is required to requests from the public for history check from either a electronically download all the information. The toll-free line receives communications center or a patrol information on a released sexual from 20 to 200 calls per hour, car could obtain a criminal history offender into the sexual predator depending on media-generated that includes a photograph. The database. Again, the Internet and publicity.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 69 the FCIC telecommunication law enforcement agency. Again, we Florida has conducted two system are automatically updated, flag the offender’s driver’s license sexual predator sweeps with task and all local law enforcement and vehicle registration. forces comprised of probation and agencies are notified of the release. This is very important, because parole officers, local law At the time this process takes place, it alerts the proper authorities when enforcement and FDLE agents. it actually constitutes pre- the offender goes to the Depart- One concern when posting sex registration because the individual ment of Highway Safety and Motor offender information on the is either still incarcerated or under Vehicles office to change his Internet is that offenders will avoid some other form of supervision. address. Any offender who does registering or reporting address When offenders change their not have a driver’s license or who changes. Surprisingly, of the 250 to addresses while on supervision, has his driver’s license taken away 300 predators contacted during they must notify probation and is required to obtain a Florida sweeps, only seven were not where parole officials, who are required to identification card, which is we thought they were. We issued send the information to the State. administered through the same seven warrants. The system is The State then forwards the new department. Any change of address relatively new, so I am keeping my address to local law enforcement. will be electronically transferred to fingers crossed that this pattern When offenders are released the appropriate databases and local continues. from the Department of Corrections authorities. One other benefit of listing sex back into the community, they can I do not know how many of you offenders on the Internet and doing register either with local law have experience with sex these kinds of sweeps is the type of enforcement or directly with the offenders’ address changes, but information uncovered. Authorities FDLE. Offenders are fingerprinted these people do not buy houses and learned of a situation where one during registration so officials can live in them for 30 years. When our predator was attending Boy Scout access the Automated Fingerprint sexual predator registry contained meetings. Someone saw his name Identification System (AFIS) to only 300 to 400 people, we had on the Internet and called police. double check that the right person some registrants with 3 to 5 address Police also learned of a predator was released from prison and is changes. who was volunteering as a soccer registering. The offender’s The FDLE also provides press coach. Another predator lived with fingerprint and photograph are sent releases for community his wife, who provided daycare in to the FDLE for entry into our notification. Every time we are their home. These cases show that sexual predator database. notified of address changes, our the system is beneficial. Hopefully, the offender will public information officers around have served some time in the care, the State send press releases to New initiatives custody and control of corrections community newspapers reporting Florida also has a service called so we will already have his that sex offenders are living in automated warrant notification. photograph and basic information. certain communities or have been This system notifies authorities any When the State receives the new placed in certain communities. The time a warrant is issued for a sexual registration information, we again newspapers use their own predator or a sexual offender. The check the fingerprint with the AFIS discretion to determine whether warrant is turned over to law just to make sure the person is who they are going to print the enforcement agents, who conduct a we believe he is and that all other information. fugitive apprehension of the sexual information currently in our Some newspapers avoid using predator. We do not care whether database is correct. the information totally. Others take the warrant was issued because of a advantage of the information and violent offense, a violation of Keeping track of print some form of notification. probation or a misdemeanor. We offender addresses The press is the most effective know the warrant provides the We update and amend the method to ensure that offender opportunity to get the offender off records as needed. The Internet and information is current and correct. the street. the FCIC telecommunications The minute information is We are very proactive on DNA system are automatically updated transmitted on the Internet and collection. We have a flag in our and our agencies are notified by fax included in a press release, criminal history database that service. We tell the service what reporters are out knocking on informs users whether DNA was county the offender will be living doors. If the information is collected for an offender’s file. We in, and the service faxes the incorrect, the press is the first to tell are trying to collect DNA samples information to every appropriate you. from anyone who is on our list of

Page 70 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries sexual predators and offenders who, for some reason, did not have it collected when they were incarcerated. States can access our information via the National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (NLETS). Inquiries to our State go directly to our sex offender “hot file.”5 There are a few other points I would like to make. The Public Safety Information Act requires a law enforcement officer investigating or arresting a person for a sex offense to check with the Department of Corrections and with probation and parole authorities to determine whether the person being arrested is on probation. If he is, the officer must notify probation and parole authorities that he or she is either investigating or planning to arrest the subject. The other point I would like to make concerns a tragic missing- child case involving a boy named Jimmy Ryce. Jimmy’s parents, Claudine and Don Ryce, fought tremendously for our State’s first broad-based, community notification legislation, which was called the Jimmy Ryce Act. That is the law that was amended by the Florida Legislature in 1997. The Ryces, who live in the Miami-Dade County area, convinced the Dade County School Board to adopt a policy that requires the school district to obtain sex offender information from the Metro-Dade Police Department and from the Internet and then mail it to the parents of schoolchildren.

5 Florida now contributes data to the National Sexual Offender Registry.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 71 The Illinois registration and notification system for sex offenders

KIRK LONBOM Assistant Bureau Chief, Intelligence Bureau Illinois State Police

Illinois has encountered many of for word that the governor signed computer terminals throughout the the same problems other States this bill.2 State so local law enforcement can faced when trying to implement The success of our program is help us carry the ball by entering their registration and notification the result of hard work by some information such as address programs — data integrity, data extremely talented people. They changes, for example. We have had quality, data consistency and worked very hard to bridge the gap experiences similar to other States reaction to legislation. We fought between obtaining registration with offenders making significant hard in Illinois to get realistic information from sex offenders and numbers of address changes. We legislation and to make sure we using it to solve and prevent really need to stay on top of that. could deliver what the legislation crimes. We must not forget that our All sex offender information is required. real goal is not only to register sex contained in the offender’s LEADS We have had many concerns offenders but also to use their file. An officer seeking information about data problems and the registration information to stop on an individual is notified reporting of convictions, especially further offenses. immediately that the individual is a since we deal with 102 counties We have heard speakers at this sex offender who had been notified statewide. We had to develop a conference use the term “zero of his duty to register. If the program that would work in cities tolerance” for sex offenders. I think individual has not registered, he is as large as and in rural we have accomplished that in in violation of the law. counties throughout the State. We Illinois. We have some great The inquiring officer has the developed a comprehensive sex stories. We registered an 86-year- ability to add information from a offender registration program. Our old man in a nursing home, a remote location to the offender’s goal is to remember the aspirations quadriplegic and an individual in file. We frequently review sex of the Wetterling family and others. the Federal Witness Protection offender records and intelligence Our registration program goes program. We even registered a man personnel in Springfield examine beyond data, it goes beyond forms, currently in a coma, so I think our the movements of these individuals and it goes beyond computers. It program has been pretty to conduct proactive risk comes down to preventing crimes, aggressive. assessments in addition to crime solving crimes and providing law We have used our Law solving. Directed messages are enforcement with the tools it needs Enforcement Agencies Data available through the Illinois’ to do its job. Ultimately it comes System (LEADS) as the baseline LEADS system similar to the way down to compiling baseline data for the reporting and the extraction messages are sent from State to we can use for further studies, of sex offender registration State over the National Crime further research and further information in Illinois. The Information Center (NCIC) system. analysis. We are confident our advantage of this system is that it is We are trying to use electronic program will have a significant available to officers and media to exchange information, impact on sex offenses in Illinois. investigators when they need it, and we are also using more I am happy to report that Illinois even for on-site investigative advanced electronic systems within House Bill 1219 is currently on our queries. LEADS is available on Illinois State Police headquarters. governor’s desk. This bill will Let me provide a quick bring us into total compliance with overview of how information enters the whole trilogy of Federal Megan’s Law and the Pam Lychner the LEADS system from our direction.1 We have been waiting Sexual Offender Tracking and probation department when a court Identification Act of 1996. releases a sex offender on 1 2 th probation. Each county is required The Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against H.B. 1219, 90 Session of the State to set up a location where it can Children and Sexually Violent of Illinois Legislature, signed by the Offender Registration Program, governor July 24, 1997. access a LEADS terminal or the

Page 72 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries county must designate an agency to that occurred in suburban areas of has only a nickname to work with establish the contact. Information is Chicago. A similar modus operandi at 2 o’clock in the morning, the entered into the LEADS system was used in each attack, and they officer can access the VITAL informing the county that the all took place in parking lots. system to seek a connection and, released offender is required to Using this map, we were able to hopefully, solve a crime more register and that he has been conduct some spatial analysis to quickly. notified of his registration determine which offenders lived Law enforcement throughout requirements. near the crime sites so we could Illinois can add information to State officials know that an provide suspect information to the LEADS records. This improves law individual has been notified of his officers investigating the crimes. enforcement’s ability to track registration requirements and Investigating officers often lack offenders’ movements. If we find where the individual is supposed to any real suspect information. an individual outside of his area of live and register so they will know When notification of an parole or probation or if he is just if the individual fails to show up in offender’s presence is warranted, traveling the State, it may indicate a community and register as we cannot spend all day knocking an increased threat. We also have required. Police and sheriffs on everyone’s door to get the word the ability to develop a suspect list. deputies can extract and provide out, so we are trying to find a way Some of us were talking information to the LEADS system. to prioritize assignments to agents yesterday about the relocation of We use the LEADS system to and officers in the field who offenders outside Illinois. We were formulate and print out reports that conduct address verification. thinking that States bordering each are accessible to the local officer. If Certain risk factors are taken into other should explore the creation of a resident of a certain community account, such as the offender’s some type of system to share wants to know who is registered as proximity to schools and other information. I know there are a sex offender in his or her town or facilities where children can information systems being county, law enforcement can usually be found. We now developed to facilitate that goal extract that information from concentrate analysis on specific nationally, but focusing our efforts LEADS. tactical case issues and we are in specific geographic areas would We use LEADS to populate trying to get into more strategic also be a great help. other databases so we can run products, such as maps detailing special reports or use LEADS the location of schools, victims’ information for community and offenders’ residences and all of notification. We send quarterly the other factors we have to mailings to schools and child-care consider. facilities. LEADS is available 24 Let me talk briefly about hours a day. We have some VITAL, the Violent Crime gratifying success stories about Information Tracking and Linking local officers who have made system. VITAL is Illinois’ first real traffic stops, obtained LEADS move toward a totally electronic “hits” on sex offenders and found police-reporting environment. We children in their cars. In some use the system for intelligence cases, officers found paraphernalia reporting. VITAL gives an officer in the car indicating that the subject the ability to prepare an on-line was planning a sex offense. Police intelligence report, transmit it were able to intervene and prevent electronically to a supervisor for the offense from taking place. approval, and then use We are trying to build a bridge technological tools to make the between having a registration report available to other officers program and using the registration more quickly. information proactively for VITAL has the capability to intelligence and crime solving include graphic presentations. We purposes. An example is using this are making significant progress in information to create maps of areas our goal to enter all information where crimes occur. The map about sex offenders into the VITAL shown in Figure 1 was prepared system so it is available to our following a series of sex offenses officers in the field. If an officer

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 73 BARNES

MURPHY VICTIM 03/23/97 WHEELING, ILLINOIS DAVIS

VICTIM 02/20/97 WHEELING, ILLINOIS ALLEN VICTIM 12/22/96 ROLLING MEADOWS, ILLINOIS

ZEMKE SCHLUETER WOOD

TODD GROVE KREBS BLEVINS

VICTIM 03/16/97 STETZER ST. CHARLES, ILLINOIS

WEBBER DICKHAUT

CONWAY BERGLOFF

PAPANIKOLAOU FOUR COUNTY AREA COOK, DUPAGE, KANE & LAKE ADULT SEX OFFENDERS - FOUR INCIDENTS POLLOCK Development of the Illinois sex offender registration and community notification program

MIKE WELTER Chief, Violent Crimes Section Illinois State Police

The Illinois program for sex is sentenced to probation or from offender’s intended county of offender registration and the date of release if he has been residence and address (which community notification parallels confined. Our laws established change many times along the way). the Federal guidelines except for a retroactive registration Sex offender data from courts enter few exceptions.1 requirements going back 10 years. LEADS through normal sources. In terms of our registration Trying to identify offenders now When this information is entered process, we register people required to register because of the into LEADS, it alerts law convicted in other States and in retroactive provisions and trying to enforcement that a sex offender is Federal courts. Those of you with bring them into compliance with coming to town. It also establishes this responsibility know how the law is a fairly significant task. a “tickler” to ensure first-time and difficult it is to identify these renewal registrations. The sex people and to bring them into Offender registration offender must register in person compliance. Our registration We have a process in Illinois within 10 days with the law program also includes people who whereby sex offenders are notified enforcement agency having are not necessarily found guilty, of their responsibility to register jurisdiction. If the offender fails to such as people found unfit for trial and are provided the various show up in 10 days, LEADS alerts or not guilty by reason of insanity. admonitions as required by law. us that the offender’s status is We do not register juveniles who The court informs the offender of reclassified to “non-compliance.” have been adjudicated, but we do this responsibility at the time of Because of the tickler system, we register juveniles convicted in conviction if sentenced to can take immediate enforcement criminal court. probation. Corrections agencies action. The duration of our registration inform the offender at the time of As mentioned, sex offenders parallels Federal guidelines. release from confinement. (It is must register with their local law Sexually dangerous persons must important to note that even though enforcement agencies. There are register every 90 days for the the offender is not considered several reasons why Illinois remainder of their natural lives. formally registered at this point, legislators took that approach. They Other convicted sex offenders must information on that person’s status think it builds accountability with register annually for 10 years. That as a sex offender is available to the the offender and with the local period starts either from the public. As soon as we become agency. Legislators assumed that offender’s date of conviction if he aware of this individual’s the agency would get more responsibility to register, we start involved in sex offender providing this information to the registration when the offender 1 In Illinois, sex offender registration is public.) actually reported to them. required in these instances: 1) felony If the sex offender has been Involvement by local agencies and sex crime conviction (including confined through our Department the community is essential to the attempts); 2) misdemeanor sex crime of Corrections, registration success of the program. conviction if victim is under age 18; 3) information is electronically convictions in other State or Federal transferred into our statewide Law courts; 4) offender not guilty by reason Enforcement Agencies Data of insanity; 5) subject of a finding not System (LEADS) on a daily basis. resulting in an ; 6) first-degree This eliminates manual input as murder of a child; 7) kidnapping or unlawful restraint; 8) sexually much as possible, and it provides dangerous persons; and 9) juveniles very precise information on these convicted in criminal court. sex offenders and on each

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 75 When the sex offender comes to The second phase of community benefits of our registration and register at the agency, the agency notification is discretionary. Every notification program. runs a criminal history check that law enforcement agency has the The third phase of community will, hopefully, determine that the discretion to provide sex offender involvement is public access. Any person is required to register. A information to any group or person person authorized to access the registration form is completed that who is likely to encounter the registry list can go to his or her again admonishes the offender of offender, such as youth groups, local police department or sheriff’s his responsibility under the system. victims, neighborhoods and other office to see the information The agency must ensure that the communities. Just recently, we currently on-line. offender reads and signs this form. shared our registry information The agency must enter the with a variety of groups that serve Illinois successes registration information into Illinois, and we provided our list to We achieved some noteworthy LEADS within 3 days. The agency the national Boy Scouts. success with the process we used to also takes a photo of the offender On the first run, they had 148 develop our sex offender that is scanned into our Violent hits off our sex offender registry registration and community Crime Information Tracking and list. That does not mean all 148 hits notification program. Linking (VITAL) system. This were sex offenders, but the Boy The method we used to develop process establishes another tickler. Scout organization did go through and publicize our program deserves The system knows the offender is the list carefully. There were a mention. We established a registered, and that he must come significant number of offenders statewide working group comprised back and register again in 1 year coming into contact with Scouts. of judges, prosecutors, probation (or in 90 days if he is a sexually The first two times we gave the list and corrections officials, school dangerous person). If an offender to the Greater Cook County superintendents, Department of fails to register, we are notified and Council, a Scout leader was Children and Family Services can start taking action. discovered on each list. They were officials, police chiefs and sheriffs. removed from their posts, and an This was a fairly large group, but it Community notification investigation is continuing as to was incredibly focused. Our community notification law whether any crimes were Group members provided input differs a bit from those of other committed during their association in the development of an operating States. Ours is similar to the with Scout troops. procedure guide, which was Kansas law: we consider all sex Most of our success with the provided to every Illinois criminal offenders to be high-risk so we registration and notification justice agency. The guide was inform the communities of all sex program occurred in these two designed to be fairly simple and offenders who are required to areas, because we are able to deny straightforward. It gives the register regardless of their sex offenders access to potential agencies a glimpse as to how the registration status. We use a three- victims. The police chief in one system should work. phase process, with mandatory, community compiled a list of the Working group input was also discretionary and public access people involved in 72 youth beneficial in establishing phases. groups. He checked first to make administrative rules and tailoring First, each school and child-care sure the groups’ directors were not those rules to deal with the facility in Illinois is given a list of on our list. He then let the directors problematic portions of the sex offenders residing in their know the sex offender registry legislation. We have seen reactive county; if they serve multiple information was available to them, legislation that gets passed counties, they receive multiple lists. and he added the directors’ names sometimes. We have to comply This list is provided a minimum of to a mailing list so they would with the bad legislation in addition four times a year, or more often if receive regularly updated registry to the well-founded legislation. necessary. We had numerous information on the same schedule Providing input on administrative instances involving schoolteachers, as schools and child-care facilities. rules is something you can do along vendors, part-time lunchroom The first time around, he found the way to reduce the impact. assistants and so forth who were four sex offenders involved with Another accomplishment worth identified as sex offenders. We community youth groups. We also noting is the effective partnership were able to eliminate their found sex offenders who owned we developed with State relationship with the school or youth camps and every other lawmakers. It is critical to establish child-care facility. situation you can imagine. This is a good relationship with your where we really experienced the legislature, and not just when you

Page 76 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries need something or when you are who would have had to walk by the take action to register them if asking for money. We developed offender’s house. This is another necessary. an ever-increasing core of benefit of our registry program The Illinois State Police is a legislators willing to sponsor bills. Using the VITAL system, we full-service agency. We combine Our most recent bill was written were able to develop a composite troopers, investigators and crime completely by the State Police in of an individual suspected of laboratories in one agency. The conjunction with the State Criminal committing a number of sex crimes State has taken a multi-faceted Justice Authority. We actually had in the Chicago area. The system approach to sex offender legislation completely drafted allowed us to examine certain registration which goes far beyond within the criminal justice factors, especially physical the registration process. We have community and sponsored by State descriptors, to develop a suspect 21 district headquarters statewide. legislators. It passed both of our list. Developing suspect lists is very A State Police officer is designated houses unanimously and without beneficial from both the State and as a district coordinator in each of comment. local law enforcement perspective. these district offices. The officer is It is also important to share Like several other States, we responsible for ensuring that sex information with legislators. We collect blood from our convicted offenders register and comply with send a brief report to members of sex offenders for genetic marker the law. The coordinating officers our General Assembly every 2 indexing. We compare that data to also act as a liaison to the local law months to update them on the status all the crimes committed in the past enforcement agencies and he or she of our registration and notification where we collected DNA samples. assists in the investigation of local program, including all our We will use that information for rape cases and other sex offenses. successes and problems. A comparison in all future crimes. We established a team approach partnership with the State Genetic marker indexing is a to handle sex offender registration legislature is very important. tremendous law enforcement tool. compliance throughout the Another success has been the We are already getting what we call southern third of Illinois. This development of a statewide “cold hits,” whereby individuals strategy has been very successful. comprehensive training program. are implicated in crimes for which When the team began, as I recall, We had 3 significant changes in our we had no other evidence other we had approximately 600 legislation in the last 2 years, so we than their DNA to indicate their individuals in that area who were provided three training phases to all involvement. not complying with their 102 Illinois counties. The training With the current information we registration requirements. That is provided to the entire criminal have, we know a large number of number has been reduced to about justice community, to schools and registered sex offenders relocate in 22 or 23 people who are out of to the State Department of Children other States and countries outside compliance right now. I would and Family Services. This training Illinois, particularly in the States of certainly recommend you contact effort costs only a few thousand Missouri (134 offenders), us if you are contemplating a dollars a year, but the benefits are Wisconsin (101 offenders) and program like this because we have incredible. We recommend you Indiana (106 offenders). These a wealth of experience. In addition consider including a training offenders can establish artificial to State Police investigators, this component in your program. havens using jurisdictional team also includes people from the boundaries; they move around not State Attorney General’s Office to State initiatives and benefits only within our State but also assist with prosecutions and so Collecting information on the outside of our State. Because of forth. We are considering location of sex offenders allows us this, it is important to share out-of- expanding this concept to all of to pursue State-level initiatives that State information. We provide lists Illinois. provide a number of benefits. We to other jurisdictions of the sex can produce maps that illustrate the offenders we believe may be locations of recent sex offenses and relocating to those jurisdictions. registered sex offenders living near These offenders may not those locations, for example. We necessarily be required to register actually had a school route in their new States of residence, but designated as a dangerous route we provide registry information on because children were walking by a a continuing basis so if they do sex offender’s residence. The move to new States, law school provided busing to children enforcement in those States can

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 77 The local responsibility

The local responsibility for control and prosecution of sex offenders: Behind Washington State’s history of landmark sex offender laws Norm Maleng The local responsibility for control and prosecution of sex offenders: Behind Washington State’s history of landmark sex offender laws

NORM MALENG Prosecuting Attorney King County, Washington

I am pleased to have the years, domestic violence always struck was that I could have opportunity to speak on the subject legislation. We took a lot of these the services of that remarkably of this conference, sex offender concepts and modeled them. We talented woman. When I look registration, and to welcome panels have the first office in the Nation to around the room, I imagine that if I of experts to our community. This establish a special unit to prosecute went to your State, you would hear is a learning opportunity for us all. crimes of physical and sexual abuse similar comments about yourselves We can learn so much from you, of children, for example, and we or others you work with. It really is and we have an opportunity to established a model domestic important to base these public share our information as well. It is violence program. policy issues on research, gratifying to deal with a subject information and statistics, and not like sex offender registration — a Research, information, just on the latest fad or somebody’s subject that so dominates the statistics idea. agenda for local and State No State can put together a One of our local newspapers governments, a subject that has perfect system, but when I consider profiled my career several years spread like a prairie fire across the what Washington State has done ago. A reporter interviewed me for United States and that has grabbed over the last few decades, it is clear more than an hour on some of the the attention of Congress — those efforts were based to a large issues I was involved with since I because we are dealing with a degree on research, information was elected prosecutor in 1978. hurtful subject that was ignored for and statistics. At the very center of Then the reporter asked me a too long. this intersection between policy and question that was simple in one The State of Washington has research is Roxanne Lieb, Director sense, but difficult in another sense. been a leader in criminal justice of the Washington State Institute of The question was this: “What system reform for the past several Public Policy, who will be on a would you name as the single most decades. We enacted new panel this afternoon. important accomplishment during in 1981, the Roxanne is one of the most your career?” Now, that sounds omnibus drug act in 1988, talented individuals I know. She simple, but turn that question comprehensive sex offender was at the center of every major around and ask it to yourself legislation in 1990,1 and in recent project I was involved in over the because you may have been last couple of decades. Any time involved in many important things 1 the Governor asked me to during your career. Sex offenses, and the need for more undertake a new and innovative Yet, it took me no more than a information on sex offenders, were addressed in the Washington task, one of the agreements I second to respond. I responded that Legislature in 1990, in laws dealing my efforts to try and reform the with civil commitment of sexually when the information is necessary for criminal justice system in terms of violent predators, mandatory public protection (RCW 4.24.550 and how we deal with sex offenders registration, release of information and RCW 13.40.217). A law is enacted and, particularly, how we deal with victim/witness notification. One part providing for law enforcement, victim violent sex offenders is my single required persons, including juveniles, and witness notification when a most important accomplishment. I convicted of a sex offense, to register juvenile offender, found to have am proud of this accomplishment, with the county sheriff for the county committed a violent or sex offense, is not only because it is a very of the person’s residence (RCW to be discharged, paroled or placed on important topic, but also because it 9A.44.130). Two laws are enacted any authorized leave or release or authorizing public agency (including transfer (RCW 13.40.215). The law is is a subject that touches people’s Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration) amended in 1993 to include juveniles lives. Every crime touches people’s release of “necessary and relevant” found to have committed a crime of lives, but there is no crime that is information regarding sex offenders stalking. so associated with pain, hurt and

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 81 loss than sex crimes, particularly was there for about 2 months when came forward to offer their stories sex crimes against children. he hid in a parking garage. A short — stories of hurt, loss and time later, he abducted and suffering. They did not particularly Victims are common murdered Diane Ballasiotes. He have suggestions as to what should denominator in sex offender was convicted of sexual assault and be done about the sex offender registration laws murder and sentenced to life in problem, but it was almost I want to take a moment to tell prison. Diane’s mother, Ida therapeutic for these people to you why this was such an important Ballasiotes, who is now a State come forward and tell their stories experience for me as a prosecutor legislator who devotes her life to before a panel of people who cared and a person, and why each one of strengthening our criminal justice about their pain. your jobs is so very vital to public system, demanded answers from and community safety in State officials. They had no Washington State enacts communities across the United answers as to why this type of landmark sex offender laws States. person was free in our community. What came out of these hearings As you know, all 50 States today In the second case, Earl Schriner was simply this: We have require sex offender registration. had a 24-year history of assaults on underestimated the hurt associated Have you ever wondered what the children dating back to the period with this type of crime for too long, common denominator is for these when he murdered a 15-year-old and we have undervalued the different laws? Generally, they all classmate when he was 16 years seriousness of the crime as well. have a name like Megan’s Law or old. After his incarceration and The task force forwarded draft the Jacob Wetterling Act. If you subsequent release, he committed recommendations to the governor look at each one of these laws in all more crimes and was sent to State and the legislature. The legislative 50 States, many times the name prison for 10 years. While in package was passed without a associated with the law is the name prison, he told prison officials single dissenting vote. It was a of a child. exactly what he would do when he five-part program that we believed Our experience in Washington got out. Mr. Schriner was would be comprehensive, balanced State is no different. Our sex considered too dangerous to be and effective. It had these offender laws were passed in the placed in a work-release facility for components: wake of several outrageous sexual the last couple of months of his 1. We addressed tougher criminal assaults that occurred in our State prison term. He was released, of sentences by literally doubling in 1988 and 1989, the types of course, and in early 1989, he the length of our prison cases that galvanized the sexually mutilated a young boy in sentences. community. Both offenders, whom Tacoma. He will also spend the rest 2. We provided treatment I will discuss in brief, were of his life in State prison. programs, not only within the recidivists. Everyone associated The response to these tragedies State prison system but outside with these particular cases knew from criminal justice professionals as well, including what is the individuals involved were time was predictable. They said, probably the first treatment bombs. The question was not if, but “There’s nothing we could do program for juvenile sex when they would repeat their because their sentences were offenders. outrageous behavior. But the completed.” This response is not 3. We originated the first civil system required their release, and acceptable to average citizens. commitment law in the Nation; this is what happened. They demanded that the State one that was later adopted by In the first case, Gene Kane was respond. Then-Governor Booth Kansas and recently upheld by finishing a 13-year prison sentence Gardner appointed the Governor’s the U.S. Supreme Court. for attacking two women. He Task Force on Community 4. We provided for a community received no treatment while Protection in response to the public notification program that incarcerated in the State prison outcry over these tragedies. The allows law enforcement to system. The prison psychologist Task Force was comprised of a decide how the community said he was not a good candidate whole series of people with should be notified in particular for release. Everyone knew what he experience in the criminal justice cases. would do. Nevertheless, Mr. Kane system. Regular citizens, including 5. We provided a sex offender had just about completed his Ida Ballasiotes, were also members. registration program, which I sentence in the fall of 1988 when The task force held hearings in believed would be a good he was placed in a work-release six communities around the State investigative tool for law facility in downtown Seattle. He of Washington. Hundreds of people enforcement.

Page 82 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries With other legislation we have The young victim had a good look priorities are serious crimes like in Washington, such as “three at her assailant, and another citizen murder. If you asked detectives in a strikes and you’re out” — and, in the park saw the man depart in a sex crime unit, they would quite frankly, with sex offenders tan Volkswagen automobile. There probably say the most serious today, it is “two strikes and you’re were no other leads. crimes are murder accompanied by out” — we most likely have the What was the first course of sexual assault or aggravated rape. Nation’s toughest sex offender action the Lake Forest Police They would never respond, “Our laws. The linchpin to the Department took in its investigation number one priority is to go around prevention of these types of crimes into the assault? Investigators and find people who are violating is sex offender registration. examined the list of registered sex our sex offender registration laws.” offenders who lived in the area. For that detective, his or her The importance of They were able to reduce the response is appropriate and correct registration number of potential suspects for a person focused on crime. But Sex offender registration is an because the girl provided a general what should we expect from the important tool in its own right, but description of her attacker. During institution, the police department, it is also a dramatic example of that a subsequent records check, they the chiefs of police or the old cliché, “The whole is greater discovered that a convicted rapist prosecutors in our community? We than the sum of its parts.” Sex named Evan Best lived just two should expect a different response. offender registration programs are blocks from the park. His mother That does not mean murder and even more effective when they are owned a tan Volkswagen registered violent aggravated rape will not combined with longer prison to her. continue to be priorities. They will, sentences, community notification The victim identified Best from but we also have to elevate the and treatment programs. a photo montage and, later, from a priority of sex offender registration, Registration becomes a vital line-up. The case is presently because we are not only interested component of a comprehensive before our office for prosecution. in the nature of the crime, but the program. The is a prime example of a sex nature of the criminal. Why do we require sex offender registry being used as an Someone once asked me, offenders to register, and not effective investigative tool. Best is “Norm, what is your most robbers or burglars? You do not also the first “two-strike” candidate important responsibility as a have to be a rocket scientist to in King County. If he is convicted prosecutor?” I always respond, figure that out. Sex offenders are of this assault, he will spend the “My responsibility is to kick the different. They are different in so rest of his life in prison without the system in the butt to make it realize many different ways, and our laws possibility of parole. This is a good what the important priorities really have treated them in a different example of how this registration are.” Sex offender registration is fashion. That is why law statute gave a kick-start to an equally as important as those enforcement must know who the investigation. serious crimes because we are offenders are, where they are and trying to prevent those outrageous what they have done in the past. Setting public safety priorities and heinous crimes from occurring We know sex offender While the public and the State in the first place. registration laws can help solve legislatures treat sex offenders as a An estimated 3,200 sex crimes. A good example of this is a high priority, the criminal justice offenders live in King County, and recent case in our community. A system frequently sets different each is obligated to register. About 14-year-old girl was walking priorities. I want to ask you this 600 more come out of the State through a park in Lake Forest Park question: What priority does the prison system each year, so we are — a very small community just justice system give to sex offender dealing with significant numbers of north of Seattle — in the middle of registration statutes? I would say, offenders. Despite this, until the afternoon in November 1996 “Not much,” because of the way recently, a grand total of two when she was grabbed by a man institutions set priorities. detectives in King County were and dragged into the bushes. She Let me talk for a moment about assigned to investigate failure-to- fought very, very hard, and she how institutions, such as police register cases. Two detectives! fought very, very bravely. Her departments, go about setting King County contains one-third of assailant decided to discontinue the priorities. You begin with the street our State’s population; slightly assault. He released the young cop and the detective. Police more than 1.5 million people. More woman and fled the scene. officers would say their most than 3,200 offenders are required to important responsibilities or register, 600 more offenders are

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 83 exiting prison each year, and we that we can work across have two detectives assigned to that jurisdictional lines. I am very proud task. of the efforts we made in the State There are a number of reasons of Washington to address the whole for this low priority. One reason is issue of sex offenses. the problem institutions have in I am grateful for this opportunity setting priorities correctly. Another to speak to you today. Maybe now reason is that, until recently, you can appreciate the answer I violation of our sex offender gave to the questions posed by the registration statute was a newspaper reporter who wanted to misdemeanor in most cases. If you know the most important work in a police agency, are you accomplishment in my career. I going to start investigating the honestly answered that it was the misdemeanors or the felonies? work I did reforming our laws Thankfully, the laws were changed controlling sex offenders, in the last session of the legislature particularly violent sex offenders. to make nonregistration a felony This topic involves a lot of hurt and offense. Felony means priority pain and loss on the part of victims within the criminal justice system. that can never be adequately measured. We in the criminal Tackling backlog of cases justice system can never say we I am very proud of our ongoing feel your loss, but we can have efforts to establish an some appreciation and interjurisdictional task force. This understanding for it and to try to do task force has the personal support something about it. of the Seattle Chief of Police, myself as prosecutor, the King County Sheriff, and other law enforcement leaders. It will be comprised of police, prosecutors and Department of Corrections personnel, who will tackle the backlog of cases that were not adequately investigated. We are going to give these cases priority treatment. We expect this to be an ongoing effort to give priority treatment not only to the crime, but also to the criminals. There are challenges ahead. One, of course, is to make sure sex offender information is available in the statewide computer database so police officers will have access to an individual’s sex offender status during a traffic stop. Another challenge is to develop communication between local police agencies. King County has 35 cities and 24 police agencies. The sheriff’s office performs contract work for some of the smaller police agencies. That requires a lot of coordination to eliminate duplication and to assure

Page 84 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Panel of the States: Enacting legislation

Creating effective sex offender legislation requires collaboration between lawmakers and justice agencies Rep. Mike Lawlor The big picture of sex offenders and public policy Sen. Florence Shapiro Creating effective sex offender legislation requires collaboration between lawmakers and justice agencies

MIKE LAWLOR Representative Connecticut General Assembly

I have been asked to shed some One size does not fit all Debate centers on how to light on the process of making sure I have been surprised at the reach common goal enacted legislation does what it is variety of the criminal justice Whether you are talking to supposed to do. Also, I would like systems around the country. In liberal or conservative legislators, to share some insights I learned Connecticut, for example, we do Democrats or Republicans, or about the legislative process, both not have any county jails. Our elected officials from urban or rural in the Connecticut Legislature and prosecutors are not elected. Our areas, I think it is fair to say that in talking to my colleagues from attorney general has no criminal everyone agrees that controls on around the country. jurisdiction, These three factors sex offenders must be made more I missed the first part of this seem to be unique to our State. stringent. I am also sure that conference, but I understand you “One-size-fits-all” Federal everyone in this room agrees that gave some of the Federal requirements really do not apply to violent, predatory, pedophilic sex Government representatives a hard Connecticut. offenders ought to be incapacitated time when they were complaining I think when we talk about for as long as possible. That is a about spending money to registration and notification central goal that no one disagrees implement these registration and requirements, we must understand with. notification programs. It is about that every State is very different. There is a lot of disagreement, time the tables were turned. Each We should determine our general however, about the types of laws of us in our own States understands goals and try to retool our specific necessary to accomplish that goal. how our own system works. The State systems to meet these general That is important to keep in mind, Federal Government often steps in goals rather than try to implement a because many of the debates taking and tells us how to retool our “one-size-fits-all” Federal system place around the States are between specific justice systems to meet its that helps States in theory but not this faction and that faction. People goals. While the government’s in application. get the impression that some think intentions are good, it is sometimes We need to understand that, it is okay for sex offenders to be disruptive because the rules the even though every State legislature wandering around our communities government wants to implement has taken a stab at sex offender with minimal restrictions. That is have more to do with the needs of registration, notification, Megan’s really not the case. Most of the the home States of the various Law and civil commitment, there is debate centers on how to write the congressional committee chairs no one model we should emulate. rules, not the central goal. It is very than they do with our States. Each State is testing its specific important to keep that in mind. I think this has been a source of practical problems related to these From a political perspective, great frustration for many State issues. At forums like this, we can there are two ways to look at this legislators around the country. I share our experiences and learn problem. (Most people do not look want you to know we share your from one another’s failures and at problems from a political frustration that, perhaps, things are successes. I think that is very perspective, but then they do not becoming overly complicated. My important, and that is why I am have to run for office every 2 message to the Federal Government pleased the Federal Government years.) The first issue we have to is this: “Just send us the money!” has decided to invest in look at is policy. What is good We will figure out how to spend it conferences like this, hiring policy? The other issue is politics. on these registration and experienced organizations like What are good politics? Both issues notification programs. Every State SEARCH and others to bring us are very important to almost every is different, but we have the same together so we can talk these issues legislator. goal. through.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 87 The sex offender issue, as much the public is upset about predatory We were also very nervous over as any other issue in the political pedophiles. the last few years in Connecticut universe, is good politics. Each and The rules we write in the State about enacting legislation that every one of us likes to talk about legislatures can do a lot of good, would later be found this issue on the campaign trail but they can also do a lot of unconstitutional. A good example because people pay attention. It damage. The most damaging is the civil commitment statute. I grabs the public’s attention and that problem is directing financial am sure that every State legislature means votes. So it is very important resources to areas that, ultimately, will soon pass civil commitment for us to be able to talk about sex do not contribute to public safety. statues now that the U.S. Supreme offender issues, but it has to be just My greatest fear is that many States Court has established the as important to write policies that may end up creating systems that guidelines. Unfortunately, a lot of respond to the problem. If it works generate a lot of paperwork and a elected officials went full steam on the campaign trail, then we have lot of forms for police and into sex offender statutes that did to make sure it works in the police probation officers to fill out, but not stand up to appellate review. In stations, in the courthouses, in the that do not contribute to public so doing, they created a lot of extra probation offices, in the prisons and safety. work for police and probation in the community. That is my goal Here is an example of a problem departments that was ultimately as a policy maker. we had in Connecticut. We torpedoed because the Supreme In order to accomplish this, we originally passed a sex offender Court overturned certain need to understand that the real registration law that required legislation. That is a problem we do problem is public frustration. persons convicted of felony sex not have any more. Citizens are frustrated by the offenses to register. That made perception that the criminal justice perfect sense to the politicians. We Connecticut lawmakers system cannot deliver public safety. were debating on the floor of the learn from justice agencies That is what people are upset chambers about what offenses This is my plea to all of you about, and they focus on this issue should carry a registration here today. As politicians, we are because they read in the requirement. Persons convicted of a interested in responding to newspapers that multiple- sex offense seemed a logical problems — fear about public conviction sex offenders are living choice. After all, people who prey safety, for instance — but we rely in their communities. These on children should have to register. upon justice agencies to educate us offenders are not on parole or We ought to know where they are. about the day-to-day realities of the probation any more. They are Unfortunately, my colleagues problems the agencies want to roaming around and preying on and I never talked to prosecutors, address. We need your input on new victims and that gets into the public defenders and other problems we can address by statute newspapers. “How come the professionals who knew how the or by providing you with the criminal justice system let these system works. If we had, we would resources you need to make our people slip through the cracks?” the have found out that most legislation work. public asks. That is what people are pedophiles convicted in our Let me give you an example. upset about. criminal justice system are not We reached out to our justice convicted of sexual assault. The agencies a few years ago to find out Connecticut’s experience offense is called “risk of injury to a what help they needed. These were drafting sex offender laws minor” in our State. You may have some of the responses. We started to address some of similar terminology in your States. these problems in Connecticut 4 or It took 3 years before that 5 years ago and, naturally, we made offense was added to the list of some mistakes. I am sure that those requiring registration. Please similar mistakes were made in keep in mind that registering other States. We also had some pedophiles was always our goal, great achievements, but we should and they were not even on the list keep the public’s frustration in of those required to register. Here mind. The public does not seem we were generating all these forms upset about the handling of every that probably did not relate to the sex offender, such as people predators who were the risk to convicted of statutory rape. Rather, children.

Page 88 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries — Juvenile offenders — Terminology The Connecticut Legislature First, we learned that, in many Another example is the actual adopted for sex cases, Connecticut juveniles getting definition of the term “sex offenders, although the prosecutors their first sex-offense arrest at age offender.” When we defined that do not apply it that often. They 13, 14, or 15 often received no term and included it on the list of were concerned that probation punishment until their fourth or offenses that carried a registration officers already had too many cases fifth arrest. In Connecticut’s justice requirement, defense attorneys to monitor. The average caseload system, individuals under age 16 responded accordingly. Once they for probation officers in are considered juveniles and not knew the offenses on the list, they Connecticut is more than 200. much happens when they get began advising their clients to Therefore, we decided to create a arrested for crimes. They may be plead guilty to crimes that were not special unit in the probation and sentenced to some sort of minimal on the list. In the most serious cases parole office to monitor only high- supervision but not much else. that hinged on the testimony of a risk sex offenders. We established Then the offenders hit age 16 and child-age victim, prosecutors felt it and funded that office and it will commit other sex offenses. They was safer to allow a plea bargain to soon be up and running throughout are arrested and prosecuted as a lesser offense and a guaranteed the State. adults, but they can avoid serious prison sentence rather than risk the We have a very small State with punishment by applying for child not testifying. only 6 counties and 3.3 million Youthful-Offender status. We were asked to remedy that people. Two of our counties now After still more arrests for sex situation by creating a list with the have these specialized sex offender offenses, they can apply for most frequent sex offenses, but probation and parole units. They Accelerated-Rehabilitation status. giving justice agencies the have been very successful and, as I Young sex offenders with multiple discretion to seek registration and said, the program will soon be convictions took advantage of all notification requirements for implemented statewide. We want these entitlements. It was not until crimes that were not on the list but the people monitoring the sex their fourth or fifth arrest that they that may involve sex offenses offenders to be specially trained so actually got convicted. against children, such as they know what to look for. The prosecutors suggested that kidnapping or reckless In my opinion, the registration young sex offenders should not be endangerment. We gave the and community notification process allowed to take advantage of agencies that discretion. If they is the last resort. The first resort is Youthful-Offender or Accelerated- determine an individual is a sex incapacitation. Registration and Rehabilitation entitlements offender even though he has not notification are fallbacks. If all else because, as we all know, people do been convicted of specific crimes fails and there is no other option, not grow out of this type of on the sex offense list, we still then by all means, we should know conduct. If we target them right off allow them to require that person to where these sex offenders live. the bat, we could provide treatment register upon release from I would rather increase the or incapacitate these types of incarceration or supervision. penalties for predatory-type sex offenders before they victimize offenses so we can put people in other people. In the end, they will — Lifetime probation jail forever. If the offender is be registered with all the Another strong suggestion we released from jail, then let us make restrictions that go along with received was for lifetime probation sure he is under tight supervision. registration requirements. for sex offenders. What good is it if That is why we implemented a As politicians, we would not someone is in jail for 10 years and minimum 10-year probation period have thought of that ourselves. then on parole or probation for a following any sentence of Those suggestions came from couple more years, after which they imprisonment in Connecticut. If juvenile and adult prosecutors who walk away without any supervision someone goes to jail for 10 years, asked to change the law in a way whatsoever? We lack the leverage then he or she will be on probation that helped them considerably. to control them after that. They for 10 years when incarceration may have to register, but where do ends. we get the justification to keep tabs on them on a daily basis?

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 89 — Intervention they are going to seek treatment or police, probation and parole, and We gave parole and probation registration as conditions of corrections. Which agency do you officers special authority to probation, because it defeats the think received the lowest rating? intervene if they determine that a whole purpose. Respondents ranked the courts convicted sex offender is lowest in credibility. The police improperly interacting with Registration as a ‘last resort’ received the highest rating. Courts, children. One convicted offender in Finally, I want to address the probation and parole and Connecticut was dressing up like issue of registration and corrections were all rated very Santa Claus. Parole and probation notification as last a resort. Three close to each other but courts officers can put someone like that convicted sex offenders in New received the lowest rating. right back in jail. We developed an Jersey get out of jail at virtually the One problem we all have is that expedited process to accomplish same time. All three have served we tend to blame other parts of the that. It makes sense. People do not their maximum sentences and there criminal justice system when grow out of this type of behavior. are no probation requirements or something goes wrong. The police The suggestion to implement that supervision. They have finished blame the courts. The courts blame program came from our parole and their sentences. They rent an the prisons. The prisons blame probation people. We would have apartment together. A few weeks parole. Everybody blames the never thought of it on our own. later, Megan Kanka, who lived politicians, the laws and the right across the street, is raped and liberals. Politicians blame the — Alford Doctrine murdered by one of them. As we all media and the courts. It is a big, A recent problem becoming know, this resulted in Megan’s vicious circle and a self-defeating more and more common in Law. process. Connecticut is that people are This type of crime could be Those of us who care about the pleading guilty to sex offenses prevented in Connecticut because integrity of the criminal justice under the Alford Doctrine,1 which we require some form of system have to learn to work allows a defendant to plead guilty supervision for all sex offenders together. It has been our experience to a crime while not admitting that when they finish a prison sentence. in Connecticut when reforming our he or she committed it. “I do not In the future, persons sentenced juvenile justice system, our sex admit that I committed this crime,” under our new laws will have offender laws or our truth-in- a sex offender will say. “I agree to lengthy supervision. Our argument sentencing system that we learn a plead guilty because I think you is that sex offenders should not be lot when we talk to the could convict me. I am not going to living near potential victims. If professionals. After we talk to the admit to the crime at sentencing. I someone finishes a jail sentence, professionals, the laws we pass am just going to take my 10 years.” and his probation and parole tend to work. Our reward is holding The offender is sentenced to supervisors feel he constitutes a a press conference and a ceremony prison for 10 years along with a risk to a potential victim, then he with the governor signing an registration requirement upon should not be allowed to live in effective crime bill. That is how we release. The offender does not proximity to that potential victim. look good. We put that in our register and his probation officer Forget about notifying the political mailers and we are done tries to put him back in jail. In neighbors. He should not be living with it. That is rewarding to me. I court, the offender says, “How can near the potential victim in the first am not a unique politician in that I violate my probation? I said at place. That suggestion came respect. sentencing that I did not admit directly from our parole people. We When you get back to your committing the crime.” We asked make it clear in our statute that States, I advise you to call your prosecutors not to allow guilty parole officials can determine elected officials who are interested pleas under the Alford Doctrine if where a sex offender can and in criminal justice and invite them cannot live. to where you work. Ask them to 1 In North Carolina v. Alford 91 Sup. I read the results of a come and listen to your day-to-day Ct. 160 (1970), the U.S. Supreme Court Massachusetts public opinion poll frustrations about too much held that an individual accused of a the other day that surveyed the paperwork or lack of effective crime may voluntarily and knowingly public’s attitudes about the criminal resources. I think you will find that consent to the imposition of a prison justice system. Polltakers asked politicians love to come and listen sentence even if he is unwilling or respondents to rate the credibility to you because it makes them unable to admit his participation in the of the different parts of the criminal sound like they know what they are acts constituting the crime. justice system: the courts, the talking about. You may also find

Page 90 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries that your suggestions make it into the final legislative packages. I get credit card solicitations like everyone else. These solicitations have fine print and footnotes, but like everyone else, the first thing I look at is the interest rate. That is all we care about. We sometimes do not want to read the fine print. That is kind of how it is with legislation. We may want to vote for a piece of legislation like Megan’s Law without taking time to write the fine print that will make the law more effective for our justice agencies. We have the opportunity to write the fine print in many of these bills, and you will find legislators and their staffs want to know what justice agencies think. What do you think will work? By working together, we can create legislation that meets the broad demands of the public and that also contains the fine print that will allow justice agencies to use the legislation effectively.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 91 The big picture of sex offenders and public policy

FLORENCE SHAPIRO Senator Texas State Senate

It is a beautiful day here in the as adjudication, punishment, traditional criminal justice system State of Washington. In fact, treatment, assessment, tracking, is usually as successful as keeping today’s weather reminds me of a registration, public notification and a snake in a shoebox. The confines similar day in Plano, Texas, which commitment. of the apparatus are simply is a suburb of Dallas. It was Labor While still in their infancy inadequate to restrain its contents. Day 1993. Diana and Dick Estelle stages, each and every one of these It is often difficult to come to any were watching their son play in a aspects is becoming a well- solid conclusions about what soccer tournament. Like many 7- developed area of expertise across course of action to take. For year-olds, their young daughter, this country. The amount of example, the debate over the origin Ashley, quickly became bored, so information and research continues and the cause of pedophilia is she asked her parents if she could to accumulate every day. However, difficult. Some research indicates it play at a playground just a few I am not here to talk to you as an is a mental deficiency or hundred yards away. Lots of other expert in any one of these fields. abnormality. Other research children were playing there. The Any input of mine in specific fields indicates that sexual deviance is a Estelles decided to let her go to the would be rudimentary to our progression of acts. In some playground. The decision will purposes here. aspects, this issue is almost as haunt them for the rest of their Instead, I would like to take a difficult as the age-old abortion lives. few minutes to share something debate over when life begins. In a single, treacherous, life- that has become very familiar. It is It is difficult to draw torturing moment, Dick felt an something that changes conclusions, but conclusions are instant rush of horror when he continuously, something for which necessary if we are to draft turned his head and saw that there is no ending or absolute effective legislation. As policy Ashley was gone. It is a horror that perfection. It is something so makers, we rarely have the luxury startles the strongest parents from obvious that we often neglect to of having it both ways. This is their sleep. In the next several view it properly. It is the big especially true when one considers hours, Ashley was abused and picture of sex offenders and public public safety. For example, am I strangled. Her happiness, her policy. supposed to believe that deviant innocence and her life were taken For the next few minutes, I sexual behavior is caused by from her. The abduction, rape and would like to step out of the micro mental abnormality or illness? If it murder of 7-year-old Ashley and discuss the issue of sex is, then punishment by Estelle became my passion for the offenders and the criminal justice incarceration would provide very next 4 years in the Texas Senate. system from a macro perspective, little deterrence. Am I supposed to It was the end of my innocence not only because of its importance, believe the argument that sex as a lawmaker, and it was my but also because of the tremendous offenses are a willful progression introduction to the very complex impact that sex offender laws have of acts for which imprisonment is and very difficult world of sex had on our criminal justice systems totally appropriate? offenders and criminal justice. As and on each of our States in a few Although information and vice chair of the Texas Senate’s short years. My premise is that the knowledge are accumulating, there Criminal Justice Committee, I criminal justice system must be are very difficult and different quickly learned that there were transformed or at least modified to issues for which there is precious many intertwining facets involved effectively handle the adjudication, little guidance, but there is one in sex offense issues. I have also the punishment, the tracking, the thing we know to be absolutely come to know that there are a monitoring and the treatment of true: Sex offenders are a very number of qualified people today’s sex offender. unique type of criminal. I like to knowledgeable in a variety of I will argue that putting the say they have three very unique aspects of this issue in areas such modern sex offender into the characteristics:

Page 92 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries • They are the least likely to be handling of Michael Blair from the He was given early parole due to cured; time he was arrested, through his a Federal court order covering • They are the most likely to incarceration and on to the time of overcrowding in the Texas prison reoffend; and his parole and release. Needless to system. There was no indication in • They prey on the most say, we drafted a series of bills, any of his files that he was a violent innocent members of our which later became known as person or a predator. That led to the society. Ashley’s Laws, that addressed next problem. some of the problems we Even while on parole, his Three broad assumptions uncovered. Suffice to say that, supervisor had no indication of I think we need to take a step without exception, the entire Michael Blair’s motivation. back so we can see the entire criminal justice system had failed Because he had only been picture; the forest in addition to the my community and it was destined convicted of burglary, Blair was trees. I want to begin with three to repeat its failure. given low-level priority in his broad assumptions. I will discuss the Michael Blair probation officer’s caseload. The first is that traditional case in more detail, not because of Because the probation officer had criminal justice systems are ill Michael Blair or the State of Texas, such a heavy caseload, Blair was equipped to handle sex offenders. but because I truly believe it free to prey on children in public The second is that the public’s illustrates what actually occurs parks. That is when he happened primal fear of these offenders and across the entire country on a daily upon Ashley. their crimes is unparalleled. It basis. The Texas experience is requires our highest sensitivity and During our investigation into the important for two reasons. One, we utmost diligence. The third is that case, one reporter asked me, now know that the Blair case did effective policy for the States must “Senator, don’t you think Michael not result from bad personnel in our include a comprehensive legislative Blair is just a quirk in the system?” criminal justice system. It was the and administrative approach to sex My response was, “No. I think this result of bad policies. Two, the offenders. is the system.” Texas experience is not unique. As you would expect, my These types of situations happen community of Plano was — Assumption one: Justice nationwide. Criminal justice completely shell-shocked following systems are ill-equipped systems are, dare I say, Ashley’s abduction. Residents were This leads to my first major bureaucracies. As such, there are saddened, and they were frustrated, point. The traditional criminal inherent barriers that make it not only by Ashley’s death, but justice system is ill equipped to extremely difficult for personnel to also by the manner in which Ashley handle sex offenders. Any carry out their duties. died. When the history of Ashley examination of the criminal justice This lack of accountability, Estelle’s murderer became known, system should include a definition which occurs when intersystem the community’s frustration turned of its terms. Let me tell you how I relationships are hampered, results into deep-seated anger. define the word “system.” I use it in the subsequent release of other Michael Blair, Ashley’s to refer to three separately “Michael Blairs” who are murderer, was a convicted sex organized and autonomous parts: incarcerated in our prison systems. offender who was previously law enforcement, the courts and This is the first lesson of the released from prison after serving corrections. Texas experience. When one only 17 months of a 10-year prison In Texas, the Blair situation was agency’s statutory duty to monitor sentence. It turned out this a textbook case study of how not to a sex offender has concluded, it is occurrence is more the rule than the handle sex offenders. Things went the moral duty of that agency to exception. As a State senator, I wrong almost from the time of his adequately pass the baton to the began to inquire about the criminal first arrest. He was arrested for the next agency that is required to justice system to find out how such crime of burglary of a habitation. monitor the offender. Clear a predator could have been paroled The actual intent of his crime was communication and effective so early to prey on yet another to snatch a child, not to steal a interagency policies are critical. child, this time Ashley Estelle. I television set. This information was Oftentimes, the problem is not called for an investigation. When I lost when Blair plea-bargained to a miscommunication, but rather a finally received the report, it was lesser charge. He was convicted byproduct of the mammoth size of literally unbelievable. and sent to prison as a common, the bureaucratic entities involved. The Internal Affairs Division everyday burglar. Even worse are the legislative and listed 34 specific errors in the administrative rules and policies

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 93 that bind the hands of criminal step back and examine the entire these offenders are kept off our justice officials and prevent them system and root out anything that streets. The fear is understandable. from doing their jobs. prevents us from efficiently After all, what could be more Granted, Texas is a very large carrying out sound public policies. devastating and what could be State. We have 254 counties and more evil than stealing the almost 20 million people. There are — Assumption two: Sound innocence from one more child? 150,000 people incarcerated in our public policy is critical I mention this area because I correctional facilities today. I was That leads me to the next think it is very important for all of shocked to find that most States, question. Why is it so critical that us to understand how the public’s including Texas, required the we have sound public policy in this justifiable fear results in legislation. express consent of the offender area? The answer brings me to the It is not the place for legislators to before agencies could share second broad assumption: the waffle on public safety matters information. It is inexcusable to me public’s unparalleled primal fear of simply because they are that an offender must give sex offenders and their crimes. It controversial. In fact, I believe permission before a probation requires our highest sensitivity and public safety is one of the most officer can share vital information utmost diligence. I do not believe important government functions. If with a police officer. This leads to you can effectively discuss the sex we do not do it well, we might as lesson number two of the Texas offender issue without also well just turn off the lights and go experience. discussing the public and its safety. home. Legislatures and justice agencies This is the primary factor However, we have a duty to do must remove barriers that prevent responsible for much of the what is right. We have a duty to do the free flow of information legislation that results in public what is just, and we have a duty to between agencies so criminal policy, both good and sometimes do what is constitutional. This is justice professionals are not bad, regarding sex offenders. sometimes easier said than done, reluctant to do their jobs out of fear For legislators, it is the call that especially when civil libertarians of liability. Information is critical must be answered, and answered are saying one thing and victims’ to our systems. Secrecy is the sex swiftly. James Baldwin once said, rights groups are saying something offender’s best friend, so we must “If one really wishes to know how else. Each of these groups has the shine a light on everything they do. justice is administered in this luxury of ignoring the other. Here is lesson number three of the country, one does not question the Legislators must hear both sides Texas experience. policemen. One does not question and try their best to legislate public Individual agencies are unable the lawyers or the judges. One goes policy with both opinions in mind. to impose systemwide changes, to the unprotected; those precisely All legislators must also realize even when they are aware of who need the protection the most, that these issues are ripe for the specific policy problems. The and listen to their testimony.” emotional fervor that leads to ill- legislature working hand-in-hand Ladies and gentlemen, if you hear advised and even unconstitutional with justice professionals can make the testimony of those who need public policy. That is why the systemwide changes. This lesson protection most, it will motivate expertise and ideas of justice was clearly written as long ago as you. professionals are so essential to this 1967, when the President’s Nowhere does the duty of our process. You must become our Commission on Law Enforcement, system manifest itself so greatly as partners in the public policy arena. commenting on the separate parts it does here. There is something You must know that your of the criminal justice system, absolutely terrifying and participation is vital to us. The stated, “These parts are by no threatening to our basic freedom heightened response to sex means independent of each other. when you talk about a sex offender offenders is too new and your input What each one does and how it whose victims are children. The is too important to do otherwise. does it has a direct effect on the nature and deviousness of these You must be the ones to take your work of the others.” offenders and the innocent and knowledge and your information to Reforming or reorganizing any vulnerable character of their legislators, and help them forge part of a justice system or a victims combine to form a highly sound public policy. Make no procedure affects the other toxic and flammable mixture when mistake about it, when tragedies components of the justice system. it comes to public confidence in the like Ashley’s occur, legislation will Therefore, a study of a justice system. The public does not really be introduced. The strength and system must begin by examining care what we do with sex efficiency of that legislation is the system as a whole. We must offenders. All it cares about is that dependent on the input received

Page 94 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries from our nation’s justice program was necessary. A change profession involving children, such professionals. Trust me. We need in one or two areas did not remedy as coaching, working at a daycare you. That leads me to the third other down-the-line problems we center or serving as a church broad assumption. never anticipated. counselor. When it finished, the task force The law now requires longer Assumption three: A had drafted 66 separate pieces of periods of community supervision comprehensive approach is legislation. I had to tell the task for offenders. The minimum period most effective force members how difficult it was is 5 years, and an offender must Effective State policy must to get even one piece of legislation serve at least two-thirds of it before necessarily result in a passed. The list was then pared it can be terminated. comprehensive legislative and down to 13 pieces of recommended We also notify the victim if the administrative approach to sex legislation. I would like to break victim’s assailant is released into offenders. I have become those down for you very briefly the community on probation, or convinced that meaningful reform into four specific areas: changes in what we call “deferred in the area of sex offenders must punishment standards; changes in adjudication.” Before the judge can contain three elements. Number community supervision and parole grant deferred adjudication or one, it must be constitutional. policies; changes in interagency probation, the judge must find in Number two, it must be procedures; and the creation of open court that the offender’s comprehensive. Number three, it community safeguards. release is in the victim’s best must be done from a foundation of interest, not in the criminal’s best expertise, not simply from a knee- — Punishment standards interest. We also require that an jerk reaction. In the area of punishment, we offender must be enrolled and I am a conservative senator. I passed a two-strike habitual sex attending treatment as a condition often agree with President offender statute that requires an of release. Woodrow Wilson, who said, “The offender to receive an automatic responsibility of government is to 35-year sentence without the — Interagency procedures render justice, not pity.” Let me possibility of parole for a second In terms of the changes we briefly outline what we did in felony sex offense against a child. implemented in interagency Texas through Ashley’s Laws. Rape is also included in the statute. procedures, we were only limited After the offender serves his 35- by our imagination. We removed Ashley’s Laws year sentence, the parole board barriers so volunteer centers can Immediately after Ashley’s must receive a favorable access quality information when abduction, it became clear that psychiatric report and 12 of 18 providing background checks for something needed to be done parole board members must vote in nonprofit organizations. Pedophiles legislatively to bring Texas into the the offender’s favor before parole are often found in nonprofit 20th century in relation to sex is granted. organizations. Background checks offenders. We went to work. With a We prohibit offenders from are essential for those individuals. watchful eye on the problems other receiving repeated community We require continuing legal States were having in this area, I supervision sentences. They are education for lawyers and judges. created a task force of experts from allowed to be on probation only This is a new field, and they should throughout my county who could once. If avoiding prison is their understand its unique help draft legislation. main objective and probation is characteristics. We provide liability We had people from every their punishment of choice, we give immunity when agencies share possible area. We had prosecutors them only one chance. information with each other or with and law enforcement. We had the treatment providers. We overhauled American Civil Liberties Union. — Community supervision the registration system database by We had parole and probation We made several changes in the requiring that the offender no officers, treatment providers and area of community supervision, longer register himself. The victims’ advocates. Fortunately, the probation or parole. We created releasing entity, the court and the Texas Legislature was not “child safety zones” around areas correction facility must fill out a scheduled to convene for another where children typically gather. registration form for the offender 18 months. It became obvious Offenders are prohibited from and forward it to the Department of during the course of our being in these areas. This measure Public Safety, where the database is discussions that a complete also prohibits sex offenders from housed. A copy of the registration overhaul of our sex offender participating in any activity or form must then be sent to the police

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 95 chief or the sheriff in the notification statute must carefully harm one, we now have special community where the offender balance the State’s interest, which laws to punish you and to keep intends to reside. is the public’s right to know, track of you. These are the This must all be done before the against the offender’s 14th highlights of Ashley’s Laws. I am offender is released. Upon release, Amendment liberty interests. Under sure we will make many more the offender must personally appear Ashley’s Laws, we publish changes in the never-ending at the local law enforcement information about a sex offender in process to improve public policy agency within 7 days. We also the newspaper if the victim was age for our State. require the offender to notify local 17 or younger. We do not publish I came into this issue as a law enforcement if he intends to information if the offender is a novice. I have learned a lot in the move at least 7 days prior to the juvenile. If incest is the crime last 4 years. There is so much to move. He must also notify law committed, we do not publish a learn. We can learn from each other enforcement of the location of his notice, regardless of the victim’s and from every justice professional new residence. age. who deals with this issue. Local law enforcement may Once a citizen sees a published Hopefully, if States work together, verify registration as often as it notice about a sex offender, he or we will not have to keep deems appropriate, and certain she is free to contact local law reinventing the wheel. offenders may be required to verify enforcement for additional I encourage each expert in this their addresses every 90 days. We information. It is very important to critical field to help States craft require sexually violent predators remember there is a specific reason model comprehensive statutes. I to register for life. Because a for notification. It is not to foster a think one of the most important complete and comprehensive vigilante atmosphere. It is to warn functions of these conferences is to database is our main goal, we made parents that they should be aware come to conclusions, as difficult as registration retroactive. of someone who lives nearby. they may be, and to help put some We began requiring sex Remind the public of this. sound and tested ideas into action. offenders to register in September Providing the offender’s exact Someone once said, “An ounce of 1991. In the last legislative session, street address may not be action is worth a ton of theory.” we established registration necessary, in my opinion. Listing requirements retroactively back to the street where he lives is often The future 1970. If you are still in the Texas good enough, and it is certainly What does the future hold for criminal justice system — and that more likely to survive a court States in the area of sex offenders means paroled, probated or challenge. and public policy? I think there are incarcerated — you must be a three emerging areas on the registered sex offender in our — Victims’ access horizon. I would like to briefly registered sex offender database. The last community safeguard I mention them. Under our new law, failure to want to discuss is the necessary The first is technology. register or to keep registration function of giving victims direct Technological advances will information current is a fourth- access to the system. The laws continue to unfold. States will be degree felony punishable by up to 2 must respect the victim’s position more progressive in using existing years in jail. Registry information and role in this area. Notify the technology, telecommunications is public information accessible to victim and the victim’s family of and global satellite positioning to any person upon written request. the assailant’s release. Allow alleviate ever-increasing sex victims to appear at parole hearings offender supervision caseloads. — Community safeguards if they choose to. Do not tolerate an Technology will also benefit We had our hardest fight in the area offender’s attempts to contact his treatment through of community safeguards. Our victim. plethysmographs,1 or public notification system was the This is a battle of rights. Whose DNA testing. most significant and controversial rights are more important in this Second, I believe you will see a measure. With a watchful eye on situation? You must tip the scales plethora of civil commitment the rest of the country, we tried to in favor of victims and law-abiding avoid the problems other States citizens. You must remove the sex experienced in this sensitive area. offender’s best friend — his 1 An instrument that measures We tried to benefit from what secrecy. Your laws must say loud variations in the size of an organ or the courts told other States. The and clear that children are body part on the basis of the amount courts seemed to indicate that a important to us. If you chose to of blood passing through or present in the part.

Page 96 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries statutes across the country in light The States cannot wait. As each of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling of you leaves this conference, I on the civil commitment statutes. hope you do not forget the big The third area is juvenile sex picture when you return to your offenders. I am extremely specific fields of expertise. concerned about them. I believe we Nothing stays in my mind more can make our smartest investment vividly and helps me to move in reducing certain sex offenses if forward on this issue than a plaque we focus attention on this area. that sits in front of Mitchell While the literature is becoming Elementary School in Plano. The substantial in this field, very few plaque reads, “In loving memory of States have truly focused on Ashley Nicole Estelle. Dedicated to juvenile sex offenders. all children and their right to play As someone at a Washington, in safety.” D.C. conference said last fall, “It’s true that not all juvenile sex offenders will become adult sex offenders, but many, many adult sex offenders began as juveniles.” If we are fortunate enough to assess and identify a juvenile sex offender at an early age, we could do so much to prevent him from a life of offending, and we could spare thousands of needless victims. In closing, I want to reiterate three points I discussed: 1. We need to overhaul our entire criminal justice system to better control sex offenders; 2. We must never forget we are doing this to protect the public; and 3. We must remember that any changes made to the system must be comprehensive, sweeping and constitutional.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 97 Panel of the states: Community notification and verification practices

The State of Washington study of the efficacy of notification laws Roxanne Lieb Community notification and verification practices in three States Scott A. Cooper The State of Washington study of the efficacy of notification laws

ROXANNE LIEB Director Washington State Institute of Public Policy

I tend to have schizophrenic about their experiences with testing new medications — one feelings when I participate in notification and soliciting their group gets the test medicine and the events like this. I am horrified by opinions about it. The results of other takes a placebo. If you have many of the stories we hear about that survey will be available soon.2 enough people in your sample, you terrible crimes. Simultaneously, I I have been asked to discuss the iron out the differences that might feel a sense of energy and research that the Institute has occur by chance. It is difficult to commitment when I see all the conducted on community use that process when determining important progress that has been notification issues. I was asked to the effects of a new law. We had to made regarding policies for sex cover this topic because our search for an adequate comparison offenses. I began to confront these research is the only notification group; in this case, a similar group issues in the 1970s, when I started research currently available. I of sex offenders who were released volunteering on a rape crisis line. If would encourage other without notification. someone told me back then that, by organizations to conduct similar 1997, a talented group of research. Study results professionals from all over the I receive telephone calls all the Our study covered country would be assembled to time from reporters who ask, “Is approximately 125 offenders discuss improvements in sex community notification a good identified by law enforcement as offender registration and law? Is it effective? Is it working?” posing high risk to the public. notification programs, I am not sure They want short answers, of These were not what you might call I would have believed it. I feel course, and I keep annoying them “average sex offenders.” They had quite privileged to be in your midst. because these questions cannot be extensive offending histories, and The research conducted by the answered with simple responses. In included several juveniles with Washington State Institute of fact, some reporters start asking histories of serious offenses. Public Policy on registration and questions about registration and it The study compared recidivism community notification statutes turns out they really want to know rates of offenders who were depends entirely on the people we about notification. “Do you want to released with and without contact from the States, who know about registration or notification. Let me stop here and respond to our surveys. We are notification?” I ask them. “You ask you: What result would very appreciative of these bureaucrats are all alike,” one demonstrate the effectiveness of the contributions. We are about to responded. “You always try to law? release an updated version of our complicate things.” There are At first blush, most people say “Megan’s Law” survey with significant differences between that learning that the notification information on 46 States.1 registration and notification, of group committed fewer sex We are also conducting a public course, and there are also keen offenses than the comparison group opinion survey you might find differences in their intended shows that the law was working. interesting. We are placing random effects. Some people, however, believe that telephone calls to adults in the State Our research covers the first 3 a finding of a low recidivism rate of Washington asking questions years of notification in our State. proves that the police picked the The most ideal research on the wrong subjects for notification effects of notification or any other because they did not reoffend. 1 The Study is available from the new social policy would include a Washington State Institute of Public comparison group. Drug companies Policy, Seminar 3162, Mail Stop: TA- use comparison groups when 00, The Evergreen State College, Olympia, WA 98505. The study can also be accessed at 2 Ibid. www.wa.gov/wsipp.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 101 When we compared the study notification as a tool for group to the comparison group, we investigation? found that they committed about The next phase should also the same number of new sex focus on the nature of offending offenses. The only difference was and the crimes committed. We tend the timing of rearrest. The to think about sex offenses as a community notification group was huge category. There are a variety rearrested about twice as quickly as of sex offenses, and there is variety the comparison group. The average in terms of the seriousness of time in the community before conduct. When we examined our rearrest was about 2 to 2-1/2 years two study groups, we found that for the notification group. It was people who were in the notification closer to 5 years for the comparison group may have been arrested for group. Some people interpret the slightly less serious conduct, if one study results to reveal that the law assumes the label of the crime failed because there was not much reflects the actual behavior. The difference in the rate of new sex number of individuals on this offenses. In my opinion, the fact question was so small that that offenders were rearrested twice conclusions are not possible. as quickly indicates that the law Ideally, the next research does have an effect. In ways we do projects will also examine the not yet fully understand, the law is circumstances surrounding rearrest, producing a different response from and the nature of the behavior. the offender, law enforcement and I do not believe that or the community, either in Washington’s experience and combination or alone. research on community notification The question that needs to be are necessarily relevant for other addressed in a study like this is States. Registration and notification subtler than, “How do recidivism systems are different all over the rates for sex offenses compare?” country and so is the way people We found that, in addition to respond to them. A notification law looking at recidivism for sex in one community is very different offenses, it was just as important to from a notification law in another look at recidivism for other community. offenses. We have consistently Thinking ahead, we must also be learned in our research on sex aware that reactions to the law and offenders that many of their new its effectiveness may vary over crimes are not sex offenses. In most time. People react differently when instances, we care so much about they hear about their 20th offender sex crimes and focus only on than they do when hear about their sexual recidivism that we forget first. An ongoing evolution occurs about the nonsexual crimes these in a community’s understanding of offenders commit. how to respond to this information. An evolution will also occur with Next stage of research regard to the reaction by sex The next stage of research offenders to the law, including both should focus on the circumstances those identified as high risk and surrounding rearrest. those who are not so identified. How many cases involved a tip Thus, one should not, in any way, from a community member that led consider this particular study as law enforcement to the offender? In anything other than a beginning how many instances did rearrest point in terms of our understanding occur because law enforcement was how notification laws work and the paying attention to the behaviors of impact they have on the sex identified offenders or using offender population.

Page 102 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Community notification and verification practices in three States

SCOTT A. COOPER Staff Attorney National Criminal Justice Association

The National Criminal Justice for active notification; its statute change, correct, modify or add Association recently submitted a establishes stringent notification information is denied, the offender draft report to the Bureau of Justice procedures that local jurisdictions may appeal the denial to the DPS Assistance, U.S. Department of are required to follow. Washington commissioner. If that appeal is Justice.1 The report describes how allows significant discretion to denied, the offender may appeal the sex offender registration and local jurisdictions when commissioner’s decision to the notification laws work in four implementing their notification court. States: Alaska, Louisiana, New programs. Offenders may not challenge the Jersey and Washington. These four scope of notification, because States were chosen for the report Alaska’s law notification is passive and because of the diversity of their Alaska’s registration and interested citizens must seek out notification laws. notification statute became registry information. It is not I will discuss the Alaska, effective in 1994.3 The offender disseminated to the public. Louisiana and New Jersey laws to must register in person at a State The law also requires the DPS illustrate some of the issues that trooper post or at the municipal commissioner to notify a victim if face law- and policymakers as they police department in his area of his or her assailant escapes from draft sex offender registration and residence. The registration form is custody, if he is furloughed into the notification laws. The laws in these submitted to the Alaska community on an early release three States are not intended to be Department of Public Safety program, or if he leaves custody for models of perfect notification laws, (DPS), which maintains the central any other reason. The and I certainly do not suggest that sex offender registry. commissioner must notify the these laws are necessarily in Notification is passive. The victim of an offender’s status compliance with the Wetterling public must request sex offender change only if the victim requests Act.2 However, I want to share information in writing on a such notice. As part of this notice, what these States are doing so you standardized form provided by the the commissioner must send the can get a feel for the diversity of Alaska State Trooper Permits and victim a photograph of the offender approaches they have taken. My Licensing Unit for a $10 taken within 3 weeks of the discussion focuses primarily on nonrefundable fee. offender’s release if the victim notification laws, but I may touch Sex offender information specifically requests the on registration issues as well. requests may be made about a photograph in writing. The Alaska law provides for particular registrant or about all passive notification; citizens must registrants in a particular Louisiana’s law seek out registry information. municipality, village, ZIP code or Louisiana’s notification statute Louisiana provides for active street. The Alaska statute protects was enacted in 1992, and revised in notification; sex offenders must the victim’s identity from 1995.4 The State Bureau of notify the communities in which disclosure unless the information is Criminal Identification and they live. New Jersey also provides contained in court documents or Information maintains a central other documents available to the registry of sex offender public. The offender may submit a information. Louisiana’s 1 National Criminal Justice written response to the DPS to notification law is unique because Association, Sex Offender Community correct or modify information in it requires offenders to conduct Notification (Washington, D.C.: the central registry or to add an community notification themselves. NCJA, November 1997). explanatory note. If a request to In rural areas, an offender must 2 The Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act, 42 U.S.C. ¤ 3 ALASKA STAT. ¤ 18.65.087(a) 4 LA. REV. STAT. ANN. ¤¤ 15:540 14071. (Michie 1996). through 15:549 (West Supp. 1997).

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 103 reveal his residence location to at Louisiana courts may order any the likelihood that he will commit least one person in every residence other form of notice they deem another sex offense. The criteria or business within a one-mile appropriate, including, but not include the following: radius of his residence. In urban or limited to, signs, handbills, bumper • Conditions of release or post- suburban areas, the offender must stickers and clothing labeled to release supervision; meet the same notification identify the registrant as a sex • Physical conditions that requirements within a three-block offender. As far as I know, no minimize the risk of reoffense, area. The offender must also notify judge has ordered any of these, but such as age or physical the superintendent of the school the law does allow judges to take incapacitation; district where he will reside. The these steps. • Criminal history factors; superintendent notifies the An offender may petition the • Psychological or psychiatric principal of every school that he or court for relief from the duty to profiles; she thinks should be notified of the register and notify. The court must • Response to treatment; and offender’s name, address and crime consider the nature of the sex • Recent behavior. of conviction. offense and the registrant’s In New Jersey, each criterion is A minimum of 10 days before criminal and noncriminal behavior assigned a score from 0 to 3. Zero the offender’s release from before and after his conviction. The indicates a low risk of reoffense. custody, the Louisiana Department court may also consider other One indicates a moderate risk of of Public Safety and Corrections factors. The registrant must prove reoffense. The number 2 is not must send a written notice of by clear and convincing evidence assigned. Three indicates a high release to the police chief of the that notification will not serve the risk of reoffense. municipality where the offender law’s purpose to protect the Some criteria are given more will reside and to the sheriff in the community. weight than others. Individual parish where the offender will criterion scores are added to reside, if practicable. Upon written New Jersey’s law achieve a total score. An offender request, a notice of the offender’s The New Jersey notification receiving a total weighted RRAS release must be sent to the victim statute was enacted in 1994.6 The score between 0 and 36 is classified of the offender’s conviction crime, chief law enforcement officer in the as Tier I. An offender receiving an to witnesses who testified against municipality where the registrant RRAS score between 37 and 73 is the offender, and to any person the resides must notify the community classified as Tier II. An offender prosecuting district attorney might within 45 days after receiving receiving a total RRAS score specify in writing. notice that an offender will be between 74 and 111 is classified as A registrant must also notify via released from jail or prison. The Tier III. mail all people living in the county prosecutor determines who Every offender is categorized as designated area of his presence. is subject to what kind of at least a Tier I offender. For The designated area is a 1 mile notification, and what tier of notification purposes, local law radius in rural areas and three notification is to be imposed upon enforcement agencies that are square blocks from the address the offender. likely to encounter a Tier I offender where the offender will reside in The New Jersey attorney general are notified of his presence in the urban and suburban areas. Within promulgated guidelines and community. If an offender is 30 days of establishing residency, procedures in 1996 to notify the categorized as Tier II, he would he must also publish — at his own community and also created the receive the same notification as expense — a notice in an official Registrant Risk Assessment Scale Tier I — local law enforcement journal informing the community (RRAS) to help determine the risk agencies likely to encounter the of his presence. This notice must be of reoffense.7 Based upon certain offender would be notified of his published on two separate days. criteria, the RRAS determines an presence — and certain community Meanwhile, Louisiana passed a law offender’s score, which indicates organizations would also be in June 1997 that expanded the notified. Those organizations must scope of the publication register with the State in order to requirement to go beyond the 6 N.J. REV. STAT. ¤¤ 2C7-1 through receive notification. Tier III particular parish where the 2C7-11 (West 1995 & Supp. 1996). offenders have the same registrant resides.5 7 Guidelines for Law Enforcement for notification requirements as Tier II, Notification to Local Officials and/or and the public is notified through the Community of the Entry of a Sex means designed to reach each 5 1997 LA. SESS. LAW SERV. Act Offender into the Community (June 1, 134 (H.B. 174)(West). 1996, on file with author).

Page 104 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries person who is likely to encounter released challenged the notification In addition, pursuant to the the offender. law on several grounds: guidelines revised in June 1996,9 The New Jersey guidelines • He claimed notification all public and private educational require prosecutors to train, educate constituted double jeopardy, or institutions, including licensed and notify community multiple for the daycare centers and summer organizations. A State prosecutor same offense. camps, were automatically added to meets with an organization the first • He claimed that subjection to the notification list without having time the organization receives notification requirements to register. The guidelines also notification that a sex offender is in constituted cruel and unusual defined “likely to encounter” to the community. The prosecutor punishment and that it invaded mean close geographic proximity to brings copies of flyers listing his privacy. a location the offender visits or can information about the offender. The • He demanded equal protection be presumed to visit. It does not prosecutor also explains the law, under the law, claiming that necessarily mean his residence. stresses the importance of the New Jersey notification Before notification, the confidentiality and warns of the law treated persons who were prosecutor’s office or local law consequences of vigilantism. After similarly situated differently. enforcement was required to visit the initial meeting and notification, • He argued for procedural due the offender’s listed address to the prosecutor simply notifies the process, claiming that the law verify that the offender lived there. organization of subsequently failed to provide an The Doe ruling also addressed released offenders by mail or opportunity to be heard and the offender’s behavior in the telephone. notice of such hearing. This is community. It mandated that the one area that the New Jersey offender’s behavior in the Legal challenges case law and subsequent community following incarceration In New Jersey guidelines addressed with be considered in all tier I want to address some of the procedural due process issues considerations, and that New Jersey case law which focuses and hearings. psychological or psychiatric on the implementation of the The New Jersey Supreme Court, profiles had to be made available, notification laws. Several New the State’s highest court, upheld the not only to increase an offender’s Jersey court decisions have notification laws, but it interpreted risk assessment but also to decrease clarified the scope of community the statutes and revised the attorney tier classification. notification and the safeguards that general’s guidelines. For Tier II Finally, Tiers II and III accompany notification. The most and Tier III notifications, it ruled offenders were granted access to important New Jersey case is Doe that there would have to be the judicial review of their tier v. Poritz.8 In Doe, a convicted sex likelihood of an encounter to justify classification. They were given offender whose identity was not notice to organizations that notice of this right to review before requested notification. Notification the notification actually took place. determinations had to be made on a If an offender was classified as Tier 8 Doe V. Poritz, 142 N.J. 1 (1995). On case-by-case basis with II or Tier III, the new guidelines July 25, 1995, the New Jersey Supreme organizations that registered for required that the offender be Court upheld the constitutionality of notification with the State. supplied with a form before the registration and notification laws The same standard was applied community notification took place. known as Megan’s Law. The court’s to Tier III community notification. The offender indicated the basis for ruling set certain due process Individual determinations were his disagreement with or objection requirements that would need to be met required to decide whether to his tier classification on the to implement the law’s community organizations that requested form. He also indicated his need for notification provisions. Implementation notification would receive that assigned counsel or he was has taken a three-pronged approach: a notification. To qualify for required to provide the name of trial-level hearing to consider offender challenges to notification requirements; notification, these organizations counsel that had already been expedited appellate review; and the would have to be in charge of the obtained. formation of a committee to examine care or supervision of women and The offender had the right to consistency in the treatment of children. That distinction was not have an attorney present at his offenders (Source: The Judiciary made before the Doe ruling. hearing. The offender also received Letter, An Information Sheet on New a copy of his completed RRAS Jersey Judiciary Programs produced by the Administrative Office of the Courts, October 1996.) 9 See Footnote 7.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 105 along with a copy of the RRAS hearing.11 In this case, the court Finally, in still another court manual that explained how the did not reclassify the offender, but decision — this one in appellate score was determined. Before the just remanded the case to the lower court — the court ruled that, to actual hearing, a prehearing court for a determination consistent facilitate judicial view of the conference was held with a judge to with its decision. In another ruling, geographic scope of the community discuss any pertinent issues that the court addressed the notification, the prosecutor must needed attention before the hearing. psychological and psychiatric prepare a large-scale map of the The judge was authorized to factors that must be considered by county with a color-coded grid to conduct the hearing immediately the court.12 In that case, the court identify low- to high-population after the prenotification hearing. actually reduced an offender’s tier density areas.13 The map had to be Another New Jersey Supreme classification from Tier II to Tier I. based upon census data, county Court case also addressed It held that the defendant’s tier planning board data, or information notification decisions.10 The court classification would have to be provided by local planning boards ruled that risk assessment was a reduced because psychological and and law enforcement officials. useful tool to determine an psychiatric factors were not taken Prosecutors were required to offender’s tier classification, but into account during his risk locate a registrant’s residence or that it should not be solely relied assessment, rendering his RRAS workplace on the map and to apply upon. Risk assessment was found score unreliable. whatever approved distance criteria not to be a scientific device. It was was determined. Prosecutors were to be used to guide and assess an also required to provide the offender’s risk of reoffense. The registrant with a list of registered 11 court also concluded that In re Registrant G.B., 685 A.2d community organizations that were nonconviction evidence and 1252 (N.J. 1996). G.B. pleaded guilty notified of his presence and the reliable hearsay evidence may also to one court of second-degree sexual basis for that notification, whether assault and was sentenced to 5 years at be considered in determining an an adult treatment center. Upon release it was because the organizations offender’s tier classification. and pursuant to the RRAS, he was cared for women and children or General rules of evidence would classified as a Tier II offender. He because they were within not apply at a tier classification sought judicial review of the geographic proximity of the hearing as they would in a regular classification and at an in camera offender. trial. judicial hearing, he sought to challenge The State Supreme Court also the predictive value of the RRAS as held that a convicted sex offender applied to his circumstances. To should be permitted to obtain an support his claims, he sought to expert and to present expert introduce evidence from three experts. The trial court ruled that expert testimony at a tier designation testimony was unwarranted. G.B. appealed the trial court’s decision. The appellate court concluded that G.B. should be permitted to present expert 10 In re Registrant C.A., 679 A.2d testimony to show that the variable 1153 (N.J. 1996). Prior to his release factors in the scale calculations as they from jail, C.A., a convicted sex related to him should result in a lesser offender subject to New Jersey’s tier classification. 13 In re Registrant E.A., 667 A.2d registration and notification laws, was 12 In re Registrant E.I., No A-3767- 1077 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1995). notified that, pursuant to his RRAS 96T1, 1997 N.J. Super. LEXIS 218 E.A. was an adult convicted of sex score, he would be classified as a Tier (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. May 7, offenses against 12-, 13- and 14-year- III offender. He contended that his 1997). The state commenced old boys. His criminal conduct RRAS score was incorrect because he proceedings to register E.I., a 21-year- subjected him to New Jersey’s never used a weapon, he was old who pleaded guilty to endangering registration and notification laws. He acquainted with all of his victims, and the welfare of a child, as a Tier II challenged the geographic scope of he had only had two victims rather than sexual offender under New Jersey’s notification on grounds that it was three because the charge by the third registration and notification law. The arbitrarily conceived, void of expert victim was dismissed. The trial court appellate division held that E.I.’s input, and therefore contrary to the affirmed the Tier III classification. The classification arising from his attorney general’s guidelines. The court Supreme Court granted C.A.’s petition consensual sexual relations with a 15- remanded the case to allow the for certification to the appellate year-old victim, involving no force, did prosecutor to present to the trial court division. not come within the “heartland” of proper proof consonant with its cases which required notification. opinion.

Page 106 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Contributors’ biographies Contributors’ biographies

Marlene Beckman revising SEARCH’s standards for California, from 1972 to 1984. He Marlene Beckman serves as criminal history record information, served as a principal scientist in law Special Counsel to the Assistant Technical Report No. 13: and justice and directed the Federal Attorney General for the Office of Standards for the Security and Justice Statistics Program at Abt Justice Programs (OJP), U.S. Privacy of Criminal History Associates, Inc. in Cambridge, Department of Justice (DOJ). Prior Record Information (Third Massachusetts, from 1984 until to joining OJP, Ms. Beckman Edition). nominated for his present post by spent 3 years as a DOJ trial Mr. Belair serves as consultant President Clinton in 1994. He was attorney in the Criminal Division’s to numerous Federal agencies and selected as an Abt Fellow. Fraud Section. commissions on information policy Dr. Chaiken’s research focuses Ms. Beckman is a 1985 graduate and law. He is former Deputy on developing and applying of Georgetown University Law General Counsel and Acting methods to improve criminal Center. Before and during law Counsel for the Domestic Council justice operations. He co-authored school, Ms. Beckman worked in Committee on the Right of the FBI “blueprint” for a new corrections and in the Civil Rights Privacy, Office of the President. incident-based crime reporting Division for the DOJ’s Law Mr. Belair is a graduate of system. He also designed a Enforcement Assistance Kalamazoo College (Michigan) and microcomputer software package Administration. Ms. Beckman has Columbia University School of used in police patrol cars in the also performed white-collar . United States and abroad. His most defense work for two Washington, noteworthy accomplishments were D.C., law firms. carried out jointly with his wife, Kathy J. Canestrini Dr. Marcia Chaiken, Director of Kathy J. Canestrini is a Board Research at LINC in Alexandria, Robert R. Belair Examiner for the New York State . The Chaikens together SEARCH General Counsel Board of Examiners of Sex authored numerous book chapters, Robert R. Belair is a partner with Offenders. She previously served as reports and articles on crime and the Washington, D.C., law firm of a research specialist for the New criminals. Mullenholz, Brimsek & Belair. York State Department of Dr. Chaiken provided Mr. Belair is also CEO of Privacy Correctional Services, where she recommendations to LINC for and Legislative Associates, a legal conducted extensive research on sex improving the sample of the and policy consulting firm. Privacy offender profiles and recidivism National Institute of Justice’s Drug and information law involving patterns. Use Forecasting (DUF) program administrative, legislative and She also served as a research and for expanding uses of DUF litigation activity are the principal assistant at the Hindelang Criminal statistics to develop State and local emphases of Mr. Belair’s practice. Justice Center in Albany, New policy. He worked directly with He provides counseling in all York, and as a juvenile probation such agencies as the California aspects of privacy and information officer in Texas. Department of Corrections, the law, including educational, Ms. Canestrini holds a B.A. Kings County (Brooklyn) District criminal, juvenile, medical, from East Texas State University Attorney’s Office, the Colorado employment, credit and financial and a Master’s degree in Criminal Division of Criminal Justice, the records; telecommunications; Justice from the State University of Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, defamation; criminal justice New York at Albany. and the Massachusetts Committee administration; constitutional law; on Criminal Justice. Dr. Chaiken and intellectual property, including taught mathematics and public software copyrights. Dr. Jan M. Chaiken policy analysis at Cornell, at the As SEARCH General Counsel, Dr. Jan M. Chaiken has directed Massachusetts Institute of Mr. Belair contributes to the Bureau of Justice Statistics Technology, and at the University SEARCH’s privacy and security (BJS), U.S. Department of Justice, of California at Los Angeles. He programs. He authored many since September 1994. holds a Ph.D. in Mathematics from studies in criminal justice Dr. Chaiken was a senior the Massachusetts Institute of information law and policy. Mr. mathematician at the Rand Technology. Belair was actively involved in Corporation in Santa Monica,

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 109 Scott A. Cooper Association, for the Legal Services Honorable Mike Lawlor Scott A. Cooper is a Staff Corporation, and for the DOJ. Rep. Mike Lawlor is a six-term Attorney with the National Ms. Feinberg is a University of member of the Connecticut House Criminal Justice Association, a Texas graduate. She holds a J.D. of Representatives serving the 99th Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit from the University of Missouri District, which comprises East association that represents State and and a Master of Laws degree from Haven and the Short Beach area of local governments on crime control Georgetown University Law Branford. Rep. Lawlor has been and public safety issues. Mr. Center. recognized in the Legislature for his Cooper previously maintained a work to reform Connecticut’s solo practice specializing in family criminal justice system, including and criminal law. He served as law Ronald P. Hawley alternative forms of punishment, clerk for the District of Columbia Mr. Ronald P. Hawley has drug policy, juvenile justice reform, Public Defender Service; for the served as Assistant Director of the victims’ rights and sexual offender Honorable Stephen W. Herrick; for North Carolina State Bureau of registration. He also pushed for the the Albany County (New York) Investigation’s Division of reform of economic development Police Court; for the Prisoners Criminal Information since 1993. and job training programs to Legal Services of New York; and Mr. Hawley began his career with promote high-wage jobs. In 1993 for the Albany County (New York) the Bureau in 1973. His early and 1994, Rep. Lawlor led the fight Public Defender’s Office. assignments included service as a for gun control in Connecticut. Mr. Cooper holds a J.D. from Special Agent, as an Assistant Rep. Lawlor attended the Albany Law School and a B.S. District Supervisor and as a District University of Connecticut, where from the State University of New Supervisor. Mr. Hawley also served he was President of the Young York at Albany. a tour of duty with the Governor’s Democrats. He graduated in 1979 Security. with honors in Slavic and Eastern Mr. Hawley is involved with European Studies. He received a Floyd Epps several committees and working Master’s Degree in Soviet-area Floyd Epps is a Board Examiner groups related to criminal justice studies from the University of for the New York State Board of information technology. He sits as London in 1981. He graduated in Examiners of Sex Offenders. He Co-chair of the Criminal Justice 1983 from the National Law Center previously served as a New York Information Network (CJIN) Study at George Washington University State parole officer from 1986 to Committee, and is a member of the in Washington, D.C. 1996, specializing in sex offender Criminal Justice Information Following graduation from law supervision. He also served as a Services (CJIS) Southern Regional school, Rep. Lawlor was appointed probation officer, Working Group and the CJIS Ad a prosecutor with the State’s as a caseworker for the New York Hoc Task Force on Security, Attorney’s Office in New Haven. City Department of Special Privacy and Policy Matters. Mr. He resigned in 1986 to run for the Services for Children, and as a New Hawley serves as the governor- Legislature. He continues to York elementary school teacher. appointed member of SEARCH practice law and is now the General Mr. Epps holds a B.A. and a representing North Carolina. He Counsel for Giordano Associates, a Master’s degree in Sociology from sits on the SEARCH Board of consumer advocate public adjust- Herbert H. Lehman College (New Directors and serves as Chair of the ment firm. He teaches criminal law York). SEARCH Law and Policy Program at the as Advisory Committee. Mr. Hawley a Practitioner in Residence. currently chairs the Rep. Lawlor chairs the Eastern Donna Feinberg SEARCH/Bureau of Justice Regional Conference Criminal Donna Feinberg is an Attorney Statistics’ National Working Group Justice Board of Directors and also in the Office of General Counsel, on the National Instant Criminal the Corrections Task Force for the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Background Check System. Council of State Governments. In Department of Justice (DOJ). She Mr. Hawley graduated from the Legislature, Rep. Lawlor chairs previously worked as a legislative Campbell College (North the Judiciary Committee and sits on assistant for a member of Congress; Carolina). He also holds a Master’s the Appropriations Committee. He as a law clerk for a U.S. Claims degree in Education from the served as the Chairman of the Labor Court (now Court of Federal University of Maine. and Public Employees Committee Claims) judge; and as an attorney from 1993 to 1994. for the American Nurses’

Page 110 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Roxanne Lieb Organized Crime and Narcotics Mr. Maleng worked in private Roxanne Lieb directs the Intelligence Section. practice in Seattle for 3 years before Washington State Institute of being appointed Chief Deputy of Public Policy, a nonpartisan think the Civil Division. tank funded by the Washington Honorable Norm Maleng State Legislature. The Institute The Honorable Norm Maleng provides policymakers with has served as King County Elizabeth A. Pearson information on issues of long-term (Washington) Prosecuting Attorney Elizabeth A. Pearson is a Staff significance to the State. It has since 1979. Mr. Maleng initiated Associate at the National Criminal conducted research since 1990 on many criminal justice system Justice Association (NCJA), where State programs and policies reforms at the local, State and she tracks congressional legislation regarding sex offenders and victims. national levels and he established a that impacts States’ criminal justice Ms. Lieb’s organization also number of innovative programs policies and appropriations. She summarized the Nation’s laws within the Prosecuting Attorney’s also conducts research for NCJA regarding sex offender registration Office. They include a nationally grant projects. and community notification. recognized sexual assault Ms. Pearson was the primary Ms. Lieb’s prior experience prosecution unit; a victim researcher for projects sponsored by includes service as Director of the assistance unit; Kids’ Court (which the U.S. Department of Justice’s State of Washington’s Sentencing helps child sex abuse victims Office of Juvenile Justice and Guidelines Commission, where she understand the courtroom); and Delinquency Prevention and by the helped set sentencing policy for Drug Court, which offers first-time Office for Victims of Crime. She adult felons. offenders the opportunity to attend a previously worked in the criminal She holds a Master’s degree in strict drug treatment program. justice program at the National Public Policy from the University Mr. Maleng has been a Conference of State Legislatures in of Washington. Ms. Lieb attended Washington State leader in the Colorado and for the Wisconsin the Program for Senior Executives reform of the State’s criminal State Senate. in State and Local Government at justice system. His innovations Ms. Pearson holds a B.A. in Harvard University’s John F. include crime victim compensation; Political Science from the Kennedy School of Government. the Sentencing Reform Act; the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Community Protection Act (which She also holds a Masters of Public includes the first sexually violent Administration from the University Kirk Lonbom predator law in the Nation); the of Colorado. Kirk Lonbom has more than 17 “Becca Bill,” designed to help years experience in municipal- and parents reach out to their runaway State-level law enforcement. Mr. children; and, most recently, Emmet A. Rathbun Lonbom’s service includes patrol juvenile justice reform. Emmet A. Rathbun began his and investigative assignments, The King County Prosecutor’s FBI service in 1978 performing including 3 years in an undercover Office is one of the Nation’s various supervisory duties for the capacity. largest, with a staff of 465 Bureau’s National Crime He joined the Illinois State employees, including more than Information Center. Mr. Rathbun Police in 1990 and was assigned to 215 deputy prosecutors. was assigned to the Criminal a field intelligence unit. In 1993, Mr. Maleng graduated from the Justice Information Services Mr. Lonbom was promoted to University of Washington in 1960 Division (formerly Identification Section Chief in the Intelligence with an Economics degree. He Division) in 1989. He currently Bureau, where he was responsible obtained a degree from the serves as Unit Chief. for various intelligence programs. University of Washington School Mr. Rathbun began his law He was promoted to his current of Law, where he served as editor in enforcement career in 1964 as a position as Assistant Bureau Chief chief of the law review. After police officer. He became a special of the Intelligence Bureau in 1995. graduation in 1966, he was selected agent for the Iowa Bureau of He is responsible for the operations to serve as staff attorney for the Criminal Investigation in 1965. of the Strategic Intelligence Group, U.S. Senate Committee on Mr. Rathbun rose to become that which includes the Illinois Sex Commerce. Mr. Maleng also organization’s Assistant Director Offender Registration Program, the served as a Lieutenant in the U.S. before accepting a position with the Violent Crimes Section and the Army. FBI. He is a graduate of Upper Iowa University.

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 111 nationwide for their insight, which also handles gun dealer Dena T. Sacco innovation and commitment to licensing and the issuance of special Dena T. Sacco is Counsel in the State government. dangerous weapons licenses. The Office of Policy Development, Sen. Shapiro is recognized for Bureau’s criminal justice statistics U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). her work in tort reform, economic center gathers and publishes Ms. Sacco is responsible for a development and criminal justice. statewide data. The Bureau’s variety of criminal justice policy Her most notable achievement was command center provides expedited matters, including implementation a series of bills know as Ashley’s information and serves as the of sex offender registration and Laws, which changed the methods California DOJ’s emergency notification laws. Texas utilized to punish sex operations center. She was an employment law offenders. Sen. Shapiro received the As the agency responsible for associate at the firm of Paul, 1995 Child Advocate Award from sex offender registration and for Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, LLP the Dallas Children’s Advocacy maintaining the Violent Crime prior to joining the DOJ. Ms. Center in recognition of her Information Network, the Bureau of Sacco received a J.D. cum laude legislative efforts. She also Criminal Information and Analysis from Harvard Law School in 1993 received the 1995 Legislator of the will direct the implementation of and a B.A. cum laude from Yale Year Award from the Texas Megan’s Law, the Jacob Wetterling University in 1990. She also Municipal League and the Act and the Pam Lychner Act. received an LL.M in European Outstanding Legislator of the Year Prior to his current assignment, Community Law from the College Award from the Texas Police Mr. Smith managed day-to-day of Europe in 1994. Chiefs Association. operations of the statewide crime Sen. Shapiro is the former laboratory system, which delivered Mayor of Plano, Texas. She also forensic services throughout the Honorable Florence Shapiro served six terms on the Plano City State. He also managed the Sen. Florence Shapiro is serving Council. Sen. Shapiro has held California Records and her third term in the Texas State numerous local, State and national Identification Bureau. Mr. Smith Senate representing the State’s 8th leadership positions, including has been extensively involved in Senatorial District. She was elected President of the Texas Municipal the transformation of Bureau Chair of the Senate Republican League, President of the Plano operations from a manual, paper- Caucus shortly after beginning her Economic Development Board and dependent system to the increasing most recent term, becoming the Vice Chair of the National League use of electronic transport, first woman to hold the position of Cities’ Advisory Board. processing and storage of data. and the first Republican to preside She is a former English and over the majority party caucus since speech teacher. She holds a Reconstruction. She also serves as Bachelor’s degree in Secondary Lisa Gursky Sorkin Vice Chair of the Senate Criminal Education from the University of Lisa Gursky Sorkin is Chief of Justice and Nominations Texas at Austin. Staff of the U.S. Department of Committees, and as a member of Justice’s Office of Policy the Intergovernmental Relations, Development, which is responsible Economic Development, State Doug Smith for defining and implementing a Affairs and the Select Tax Reform Doug Smith is Chief of the broad range of policy initiatives and Public School Finance California Department of Justice’s regarding crime, welfare reform and committees. (DOJ) Bureau of Criminal access to justice. Ms. Sorkin’s Sen. Shapiro has earned Information and Analysis. Mr. responsibilities include a variety of numerous honors during her Senate Smith is responsible for the criminal justice policy matters, tenure, including the 1993 development, operation and including implementation of the Distinguished Legislative Service maintenance of statewide criminal Violence Against Women Act; sex Award from the Texas Municipal justice information system offender registration and notification League and the Legislator of the databases in such diverse areas as laws; and victims’ rights. Year Award from the National wanted persons, stolen vehicles and Ms. Sorkin served from 1989 to Republican Legislators property, restraining orders, and 1992 as a telecommunications Association. She was chosen by subjects on supervised release policy analyst for the Subcom- the Council of State Governments status. mittee on Telecommunications and as a 1993 Toll Fellow, an award In addition, all California firearm Finance of the U.S. House of given to only 35 officials sales are cleared through the Bureau, Representatives’ Committee on

Page 112 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Energy and Commerce. From 1987 where he investigated a wide range She was elected to the Leon to 1989, she was a research analyst of criminal violations. He also County (Florida) School Board in at Strategic Planning Associates, a served in the Los Angeles Division, 1988. She served on the Board for 8 Washington, D.C.-based where he was assigned to the Los years, including two as Board chair, management consultant firm. Angeles Joint Drug Intelligence and focused on safe-school policies Ms. Sorkin holds a B.A. with Group, a multi-agency drug and procedures. She conducted crisis highest distinction from the intelligence task force. As the intervention, interagency University of Michigan and a J.D. squad’s principal relief supervisor, collaboration and Serious Habitual from . Mr. Thomas assisted the supervisor Offender Comprehensive Action in managing the High Intensity Program (SHOCAP) training and Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA)- safe-school planning throughout the James C. Swain funded task force. State. She currently teaches at James C. Swain directs the State Mr. Thomas holds a B.A. in Florida State University as an and Local Assistance Division, Political Science/Public adjunct professor in the School of Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), Administration from Miami Criminology. She also serves as a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). University (Ohio). He received his consultant for Fox Valley Technical Mr. Swain formerly served as J.D. from the Ohio Northern College in Wisconsin. Director of the BJA’s Discretionary University College of Law in 1985. Ms. Uzzell is a certified crime Grant Division and of the Policy prevention practitioner and former Development and Management D.A.R.E. officer. Her contribu- Division. Prior to his BJA service, Donna M. Uzzell tions to child safety were recognized he served on a task force that wrote Donna M. Uzzell was appointed with a Law Enforcement Officer of draft legislation and program Director of the Florida Department the Year award and other honors. structure that lead to the agency’s of Law Enforcement’s (FDLE) Ms. Uzzell served on several creation in 1984. Criminal Justice Information statewide task forces that considered Mr. Swain served as Director of Services in November 1996 after school, child safety and juvenile the Courts Division in the Law serving as Special Agent in Charge justice issues. In 1993, she Enforcement Assistance of the Department’s Investigative completed a 4-month special Administration and as a Center Support Bureau. assignment with the Commissioner Chief at the National Institute of Information Services provides: of Education to explore collabora- Justice, DOJ. • Instant telecommunications tive relationships between law Mr. Swain is a graduate of the for law enforcement enforcement and education. That University of Illinois Law School. throughout Florida; same year, she spent 5 months on • Information storage and special assignment to the Florida retrieval in Florida and over Attorney General’s Office to Ralph C. Thomas the entire Nation; develop and implement the Florida Ralph C. Thomas entered the • Criminal identification Community Juvenile Justice FBI as a Special Agent in 1986. services; Partnership Grant Program. Mr. Thomas has served at the • The ability to document and Ms. Uzzell currently serves as Bureau’s Washington, D.C., analyze criminal activity for her State’s representative to the headquarters since April 1996. He the entire State; SEARCH Membership Group. is currently assigned to the Policy, • Statistical and crime-trend Planning and Analysis Unit analysis; (PPAU), Criminal Investigative • Criminal record inquiries for Mike Welter Division, as a Supervisory Special government, private and Mike Welter has served the Agent. PPAU is responsible for a public requests; Illinois State Police for 13 years, wide variety of administrative and • Improved system integrity the last 3 as Chief of its Violent policy issues that directly impact through biennial terminal Crimes Section. The section FBI criminal investigations. Co- audits; and oversees sex offender registration chairing the Bureau’s Pam Lychner • A statewide law enforcement and community notification in Sexual Offender Task Force is one training program. Illinois. He served on two statewide of Mr. Thomas’ supervisory Prior to her FDLE appointment, task forces that studied domestic responsibilities. Ms. Uzzell spent 13 years with the violence and sexually motivated Mr. Thomas previously served Tallahassee Police Department, crimes. Mr. Welter assisted in in the FBI’s San Antonio Division, rising to the rank of sergeant. federally sponsored training

National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Page 113 focusing on child abuse the National Center for Missing & investigations and he published Exploited Children (NCMEC); the numerous articles on related topics. Association of Missing and He retired from the U.S. Army Exploited Children’s Organizations as a Lieutenant Colonel following a (AMECO); and the Tri-County distinguished career that included Crimestoppers Inc. Ms. Wetterling combat tours in Vietnam and Iran. also serves as co-chair of the Mr. Welter holds three Masters’ Millstream Arts Festival. degrees with major fields of study Ms. Wetterling has received in law, business administration and numerous awards for her leadership military science. in child advocacy. Her legislative accomplishments include the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Patty Wetterling Children Registration Act on the Patty Wetterling is the mother State level. The Jacob Wetterling of Jacob Wetterling, who was Crimes Against Children and abducted October 22, 1989, near his Sexually Violent Offender home in St. Joseph, Minnesota. Registration Act was enacted on the The former teacher — now a self- Federal level as part of President described “stay-at-home-mom” with Clinton’s 1994 Crime Bill. Ms. four children — has become a Wetterling’s message of Jacob’s respected national spokesperson on hope has resounded nationwide as a child safety issues. call to action and hope for missing Following the abduction of children everywhere. Jacob, Ms. Wetterling and her husband, Jerry, co-founded a not- for-profit foundation to educate parents and children to prevent the abduction, molestation and exploitation of children and to continue searching for Jacob and the thousands of other children reported missing each year. As a Jacob Wetterling Foundation volunteer, Ms. Wetterling has appeared before hundreds of groups throughout the United States. She shares information about child molesters and their victims and offers specific safety information to children and parents. While she continues to speak frequently, she trains other volunteers to spread the Foundation’s message. In addition to working as a full- time volunteer for the Jacob Wetterling Foundation, Ms. Wetterling trains law enforcement on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. She serves on the Wetterling Foundation’s Board of Directors and also on the Boards of Directors of

Page 114 National Conference on Sex Offender Registries Appendix U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Office of the Director Washington, D.C. 20531

June 18, 1997

Dear In follow up to my January 31, 1997, letter providing information regarding the compliance review process for State submissions of their sex offender registration and notification programs under the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act ("the Wetterling Act"), 42 U.S.C. ¤ 14071, this letter provides instructions for States that intend to submit requests for an extension of the September 13, 1997, compliance deadline, i.e., States that are not now able to submit to us a sex offender registration and notification program in complete compliance with the Wetterling Act and Megan's Law. You will recall that under the Wetterling Act, as amended by Megan's Law, States must adopt sex offender registration and notification systems meeting specified minimum standards. This may be accomplished by legislation, regulation, or administrative policy. States which fail to implement a registration and notification program consistent with the Wetterling Act by the September 13, 1997, deadline -- three years from the September 13, 1994, enactment date -- will not receive 10 percent of their Byrne formula grant funds that would otherwise be allocated to the State under section 506 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. ¤ 3765). However, as you know, the Wetterling Act contains a provision allowing States that show "good faith efforts" to comply with the Wetterling Act by the statutory deadline to be granted a two-year extension of time to continue their efforts to establish a compliant program. In order to ensure that any State requesting an extension receives its full Byrne funding allocation, it should submit to BJA for review (1) its most recent proposed or enacted registration and notification program, and (2) a letter requesting that the State be granted a two-year extension of the statutory deadline, explaining its "good faith efforts" -- both past steps taken and future plans -- to implement the Wetterling Act and Megan's Law. The letter should describe the specific "good faith efforts" the State has made to come into compliance, including an explanation of the concrete steps taken and the progress made, since the passage of the Wetterling Act in September 1994, toward the goal of establishing a registration and notification program in complete compliance with the Wetterling Act and Megan's Law. The State should also explain the reasons why it has not been able to establish a compliant program by the statutory deadline. In addition, the State should describe in detail its plan to establish a compliant program prior to or by the end of the extension period and submit a timetable, specifying the anticipated time frame within which each step of its overall plan will be taken. We request that States make their submissions to BJA by July 13, 1997. State requests for an extension of time based on their "good faith efforts" will be reviewed and granted on a case-by-case basis. Finally, if you have any questions regarding the processing of your State's submission of its registration and notification program for compliance review under the Wetterling Act and Megan's Law, or if you would like other assistance, please contact Jim Swain, Director, State and Local Assistance Division, or Omar Mohammed at (202) 514-6638. Sincerely, Nancy E. Gist Director