Megans Law

jellie

Ive been watching a a programme on tv3 and its about rape and sex offenders. In the US they have a registered sex offenders list which is publicly accessible.

Megan's Law was inspired by the case of seven-year-old Megan Kanka, a New Jersey girl who was raped and killed by a known child molester who moved across the street from the family. The Kanka family fought to have local communities warned about sex offenders in the area. The New Jersey legislature passed Megan's Law in 1994.

In 1996, the U.S. Congress passed Megan's Law as an amendment to the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children's Act. It required every state to develop some procedure for notifying the public when a sex offender is released into their community. Different states have different procedures for making the required disclosures.

(http://crime.about.com/od/sex/a/megans_law.htm)

Apparently the UK are piloting a similar system. In Ireland it seems the gards have a sex offenders register in the garda station but this is not publicly accessible.

Do you think this is something we should have? There are arguments for and against it though personally I think the benefits are greater than the negatives.

Apologies if all my information is not accurate

Ickle Magoo

I think people should be able to check if the people who have or would have regular & unsupervised access to their kids are on the sex register. Do I think a list of known paedophiles names and addressed should be available to the public? No.

Statistic would suggest the majority of child abusers are people the parents invited into the house, into the child's life, people they already knew, they may have no criminal record.

I don't think anything beats parental vigilance, teaching kids what is acceptable and what is not, teaching them the proper terminology for their bodies, repeating that no-one is allowed to do anything to them they don't like, that their parents will always believe them and never be angry if they want to speak to us about someone doing something they don't like or that makes them uncomfortable and so on...

Manic Moran

I dislike the law for two reasons.

1) If the individual is released, (s)he's deemed to have served his time, been rehabilitated, and is no longer a threat to society. There are several knock-ons to this. Firstly, if (s)he's served his pennance, (s)he should be able to live free of fear of vigilante justice. "I think I'll go look up a sex offender and castrate him!" You can't really do that for murderers or any such as far as I know. It likely affects other people as well. "I've got this house I'm selling for $500k." "Sorry, you have a registered sex offender living next to you."

2) There is always the law of unintended consequences from well-meaning, but not-thought-out laws. For example, many versions of Megans Laws have a mandate that the offender, when released as safe for society, must not live within a mile or whatever of a school. Wonderful in theory. (Do they not have cars? Can they not walk? Why are they out if they're a threat to schoolchildren?). In practice, however, you ever try living in a town a mile from a school in the US? There was one case recently where a victim was discovered to have over 40 registered sex offenders living within a half-mile of her. Not her fault that the laws resulted in only a square mile of the city which didn't have a school within a mile. There's one county, in Georgia, I think it is, in which there is not a single structure which it is legal for an RSO to inhabit. The similarly intended Lautenberg Amendment (which prohibits firearm ownership for life of anyone convicted of a misdemeanour domestic violence) has also started taking a serious battering in the courts for being unreasonably excessive, to the level that it gets people fired from their jobs. (Can't be a soldier without a gun, after all).

NTM

Stella777

There was a news story about a year ago about sex offenders in Georgia who were living in a tent camp, because it's literally the only place they can live that meets the qualifications.

I once had a neighbor knock on my door to inform me that he was a sex offender. Apparently it was one of the requirements for his parole. TBH it was one of the more uncomfortable experiences of my life. I wasn't quite sure what to do with that bit of information.

irishh_bob

not often im on the side of wooly liiberal do - gooders but in this instance , i was on the side of the south african doctor rather than the populist rabble rousing tabloid editor , alerting the public to the whereabouts of sex offenders would inevitabley result in vigilante style attacks , the guards need to keep a hawk eye on sex offenders but that is where it should end

spidey7

Hi

in response to this thread.....the majority of criminal psychologists around the world have gone on record to say that the vast majority (sometimes quoted at 95%!!) of reg Sex Offenders (RSO) are unresponsive to treatment, are beyond rehabilitation and therefore pose a huge threat to society!
They say that (95%!!!!!) they will reoffend!!! But yet they get released, and as we all know ARE NOT MONITERED enough and are free to roam, select and prey on the next intended victim!

How can you hope to rehabilitate a sex offender and re-integrate him into the community when the very reason he offended in the first place is because of a psychological/ emotional urge to cause pain, suffering and degradation to his victim! This urge cannot be removed by 4-6 years incarceration and 'counselling'...its not like he robbed a bank for money and then gets educated! Or gets a trade or just some morals to show him that he doesnt have to rob a bank for money! The Sex offender cant substitute his urges and needs, HE HAS TO DO IT....

so that leaves u and our loved ones vulnerable to these predators.

THEY SHOULD BE NAMED
THEY SHOULD BE RECOGNISED
THIER ANNONYMITY IS OUR WEAKNESS!!

BECAUSE of thier crime they SHOULD NOT be afforded the luxury of freedom, i am not advocating vigilanties, not at all but i do not agee with the current situation regarding these predators.

How many more women and children have to suffer at the hands of these animals before the government finally get the message.

We need our Megans Law and we need it NOW!

pikachucheeks

I was going to post a thread about this the other day!

The programme is called MidWeek and the episode, released to re-offend, can be found here.

Personally, I thought it made for good viewing. Harrowing and frightening, but I'm glad I watched it. Definitely opened my eyes.

jellie wrote: »

Do you think this is something we should have? There are arguments for and against it though personally I think the benefits are greater than the negatives.

I'm pretty torn about Megan's Law, personally.

I can appreciate that having an online list of all sexual criminals available to people does allow parents and guardians to protect their children, keep them from danger, but it also allows members of the public to abuse information at their finger tips and take the law in to their own hands.
IE. Using the register to locate a sex offender in the locality, then burning down their house, to punish them for their crime(s) / express anger at them living in the area etc.

spidey7

Yes i agree in a way, it may encourage or at least aid some violence against offenders but i still think the benefits of having the information out there would allow the public to be a little more vigilant themselves, rememeber the saying

"to be forewarned is to be forearmed"

The original Megans Law came about after the little girl was raped and murdered by a RGO living across the street, if this law was around then she may be alive today!

I hope we never have a tragedy like that visit us and end up saying

"OMG i wish id known!!!"

if we know a predator is in the area we can educate our loved ones and inform them, the worrying thing is that the RGO's are just the KNOWN ONES!! We need to be on our guard ALL THE TIME!

Nevyn

Stella777 wrote: »

I once had a neighbor knock on my door to inform me that he was a sex offender. Apparently it was one of the requirements for his parole. TBH it was one of the more uncomfortable experiences of my life. I wasn't quite sure what to do with that bit of information.

The thing is if a person was drunk and was caught 'mooning' then they are done for indecent exposure and put on the sex offenders register.

I would hate to think of someone driven out of thier house or worse 30 years after they were drunk at a mates 21st and mooned someone.

FouxDaFaFa

Interesting topic.
The problem, as I see it, is that the term "sex offender" is too broad for this to work. It could be that the person in question is a predatory rapist or paedophile but equally it could be a guy who had sex with his girlfriend when she was 16 and he was 17. These are both "sex offenders" under law as far as I know but represent different levels of threat to society.

I think police monitoring is the way to go.

jellie

I dont feel particularly strongly for or against it. After watching MidWeek (thanks pikachucheeks!) they had me convinced it would do more good than harm, though I can see the pros and cons, particularly when it comes to what defines a sex offender.

Maybe there should be levels of risk associated with sex offenders? A guy mooning at a 21st is hardly a high risk whereas the likes of Larry Murphy is on a completely different level. Or maybe the term "sex offender" needs to be redefined?

Wibbs

While I see some logic in the notion of this kind of law, I also see where it could simply be the law of the mob too. It seems like a good idea, but in practice the issues that MM and Thaedydal noted come up.

seamus

Children would be far safer if it was illegal for any male member of their family to ever be in contact with them, without a female present.

Yes it's ridiculous, but it's the truth: The vast, vast majority of sexual offences against children are carried out by male family members.

But of course, such a law would be completely ridiculous an unfair on the vast majority of the population who are not involved in such crimes.

My point is that laws should aim to be comprehensively protective and directed towards the greatest source of risk. Patching up a single hole in a sieve won't stop the water falling through.

An open, online list of RSO will not make children any safer, from a statistical point of view because it doesn't remove the greatest risk to your children. All it does is victimise one group of people in exchange for the false peace of mind of another.

I agree with others that "sex offender" is far too broad a stroke for this. Sex offences need to be classed and the need for public declaration needs to be based on a number of factors, such as:

1. The type of offence - public nudity and sexual assualt are two very different things, with massively different implications for the public, but both my require registration as a sexual offender.
2. The severity of the offence - incidental rape arising from a misunderstanding/miscommunication, or statutory rape by a 17yo on a 15yo are not the same thing as a violent assault and have very different reoffence rates.
3. The victim - assualt of a family member doesn't indicate a liklihood of assaulting a random member of the public, for example
4. Reoccurences - Someone who has reoffended once is likely to continue reoffending.

So then you basically have a grading system, where the more "points" you score, the greater the public threat you pose, therefore the more reason to include them on an RSO list.

So for example, if it's a seven-point "limit", someone might get 1 point for public nudity, but 2 points for sexual assault. You get 1 point if the victim is a member of your family, but 2 if they're "random" or otherwise not a close acquaintance.
The judge can arbitrarily assign from zero to five points depending on the severity of the assault/offence.
You get another single point if you had an adult "victim" (no points if there's no direct victims), 2 points for a child "victim".
You get ten points for reoffending.

So you maintain this list for the person's entire life and at any time that someone racks up 7 points, they get put on the RSO list for the rest of their life.

ztoical

Thaedydal wrote: »

The thing is if a person was drunk and was caught 'mooning' then they are done for indecent exposure and put on the sex offenders register.

I would hate to think of someone driven out of thier house or worse 30 years after they were drunk at a mates 21st and mooned someone.

+ 1 I had a friend who had to go to court a few years back as he had been charged with urinating in public when in fact he was vomiting....might not seem like a major difference, fine was going to be the same but there was a risk of him ending up on a sex offenders list [this was in New Jersey not Ireland] if he was charged with urinating in public.

With a law concerning access to a sex offenders list it's case of a person is smart but people are stupid. I agree with certain people like the police, social workers etc having access to a list and limited access to members of the public if they present the police with a good enough reason but having it out open in the public you end up with a mob mentality. People see the word "sex offender" and it's like a red flag to a bull. Very little time is spent looking at the details.

I watched a sunday morning talk show discussion on the bbc a few weeks back and they had some hysterical mother on who did everything short of screaming "won't someone body think of the children!!!" Her children had never been abused nor had she or anyone close to her but she had such a terrible all consuming fear of the evil man in the shadows she never let her children outside. These are the kind of people who should never be given access to a sex offenders list cus frankly they are just looking for someone to attack. They are the ones who won't stop to read any facts. Someone can be on a list for having sex with a 15 year old when they themselves were 17. People also seem to see sex offender = pedophile which is not always the case.

Yes there are monsters out there but we should be focused on getting stricter prison terms for rapists and child abusers cus frankly some of the sentences are a joke, improved treatment like behavioral therapy while prison [which would help in spotting prisoners most likely offend again once released] and yes monitor them when/if they get out but monitored by the police and social workers not the public.

biko

Not to mention the fact a registry was hacked into and info stolen. It could also mean that a hacker can add names to the registry for fun.

A hacker can also upload kiddie porn to your computer and then call the police.

Considering you can now be convicted of computer crimes just for using host -l in North Dakota, it should come as no surprise that the FBI started charging people with kiddie porn for visiting a URL the FBI set up. Think about the implications of that for a moment: you could, conceivably, click on a link that was labeled, "Click Here for Antique Furniture Sale", and end up on a sex offenders registry. The FBI has reportedly taken down the entrapment "honeypot"--but not before the reputations and careers of supposed "offenders" may have been destroyed.

I say No to public offender list, based purely on the security arrangements. Yes to police monitoring.

Galvasean

For the reasons stated above I would be against having the sex offenders registry open to the public. It would be unfair to see someone who mooned someone as an 18 year old find themselves on the recieving end of vigilante mob style 'justice'.
That said, if there is a known paedophile/rapist in your area IMO you should be informed. When you consider the amount of repeat offenders doing the rounds.

Maybe remove all mooners/public urinators off the 'sex offenders' list and on to a 'public indecency' one?
The sex ofenders list is a sham in it's current form. It would be like having a 'criminals list' for everyone who ever commited any crime, be it not paying a parking kicket or serial murder.

shellykbookey

Why can they just put your offence on the register? What i cant understand is the behaviour of judges in ireland they sit in court listen to how one of these baxtards has destroyed someone's or a few peoples lives wait, for the jurys verdict, say how disgusted they are with the offender and give them a suspended sentence so they're back out in a bout a year. Do they not live in the real world or have families?! There was a case in the last few years (cant remember when exactly) where woman was raped a few times in the bathrooms of supermacs in galway after a night out. They guy who attacked her had a string of convictions including a number for agrivated sexual assualt which he got laughable sentences for. The juge on this case had sentenced him before for the sexual assualts and defended giving him suspended sentences because he said he was trying to help the offender, i think he got a few years this time around. And what about that guy in dublin they keep letting out early for good behaviour and everytime he does he's re arrested within a few days after attacking a string of women. The fact that murders and rapists can get early release for not murdering or raping someone in prision is a slap in the face to victims. Sorry this turned into a rant but if they put your offence and frequency of offences on the register beside your name then the public can know what there up against.

spidey7

Good thread, interesting comments. having the offenses listed or a "score" system may help to eliminate some of the less violent/ dangerous RSO.
it really is down to the government to legislate for this, look at the Rape crisis centre stats and compare them to the Garda Crime stats of the same year and see the difference between the calls for counselling, calls to the Gardai, actual attempted prosecutions and ACTUAL CONVICTIONS!

very alarming

education, preparation and awareness are what will save ours and our kids lives when we are no doubt going to have to face these predators at some point in the future. Its up to us at the end of the day to protect ourselves and our loved ones as i cant see any pro-active changes in our laws that will keep us out of harm from these evil predators.

for now its probably only something we read about, or hear about. Not actually something that has affected us or reached our family or loved ones YET! But when it does what then? When will something be done?

I know of good self defence courses around the country, but ive also heard about some bad ones.
My sister did one years ago in Transistion year in school which was really good and really gave her great awareness and opened her eyes to the dangers that are out there.
If i can find out the course il post it as she still has handouts and the info was great, how to spot pre attack cues, tap into your instincts and intuition, and really effective and simple techniques that she learned in 1 day! she kicked my ass anyway!

i know myself and our parents were really happy with her doing the course because it was a lot more than just punching and kicking, It was real and i know she feels a lot more confident now even a few years later as she know what to look for when shes out in town

i heard the laws regarding self defence in Ireland may be changed, leading on to another interesting debate and very relative to this thread!

Podge_irl

seamus wrote: »

1. The type of offence - public nudity and sexual assualt are two very different things, with massively different implications for the public, but both my require registration as a sexual offender.
2. The severity of the offence - incidental rape arising from a misunderstanding/miscommunication, or statutory rape by a 17yo on a 15yo are not the same thing as a violent assault and have very different reoffence rates.
3. The victim - assualt of a family member doesn't indicate a liklihood of assaulting a random member of the public, for example
4. Reoccurences - Someone who has reoffended once is likely to continue reoffending.

So then you basically have a grading system, where the more "points" you score, the greater the public threat you pose, therefore the more reason to include them on an RSO list.

So for example, if it's a seven-point "limit", someone might get 1 point for public nudity, but 2 points for sexual assault. You get 1 point if the victim is a member of your family, but 2 if they're "random" or otherwise not a close acquaintance.
The judge can arbitrarily assign from zero to five points depending on the severity of the assault/offence.
You get another single point if you had an adult "victim" (no points if there's no direct victims), 2 points for a child "victim".
You get ten points for reoffending.

So you maintain this list for the person's entire life and at any time that someone racks up 7 points, they get put on the RSO list for the rest of their life.

Someone who moons someone in public 7 times is still not a "sexual offender" in my book. An idiot, sure, but they're very different things.

The RSO list in the States is diluted to the point of being completely ineffective. It has multiple problems, for both potential victims and offenders (especially bearing in mind that these offenders range from people who peed in the street to those who committed multiple rapes). One of the bigger problems I have with it is that it feeds into the massively ill-informed notion that strangers in white vans are the biggest threats that children face and does nothing to educate the public about more realistic problems that children face. Obesity from staying inside harms far more children than sexual predators ever will for one example.

seanybiker

yes we should have something like this in ireland. They should also be tagged and then shot.