The results are in from “Operation Predator”, the joint operation of state and federal officers that included sheriff’s offices from 39 counties in Florida, and they are pretty weak.
According to Suncoast News, a total of 10,839 face to face verifications were conducted and 134 arrests were made for registration violations. That’s not new sex crimes, just technical violations of the arduous and confusing sex offender registration rules. Still, the quick math tells us that’s 1.2%!
Yes, just a bit over one percent of the over ten thousand registrants checked were found to be in violation and… reminder… that isn’t found to be committing new crimes… those are registration violations. Pasco County, which recently felt the need to more than double it’s residency restriction had only five out of 830 (that’s 0.6%) out of compliance.
While the results didn’t mention any children being saved or abductions solved, clearly if ANY had been, it would have been mentioned, so one must wonder how many millions of dollars of taxpayer money were spent on “Operation Predator” which yielded such weak results?
Just one more way we are spending tax dollars to harass a segment of our population who, in most cases, are living law abiding lives as they try to reintegrate back to society after paying their debt. Just curious how much $ did this cost the tax payers and what did we really accomplish? Again I doubt there was a return on this investment.
Over 93% of potential victims are not served by current policy.
Take the dollars spent here and let’s focus on true prevention. Before a crime is committed and when returning registrants come to our communities after incarceration or supervision and offer support for success instead of so many regulations making it near impossible to navigate successfully.
The research is clear about what works and what creates safer communities… WE ARE NOT DOING ANY IF IT! So I’d be asking our “leaders” WHY?
There was a conversation at a FAC mtg about what constitutes the parameters of a “compliance check? ”
1) what are the statutory titles and definitions of the checks that are to be done?
2) of the statutory requirements that we are to comply to? And are there varying requirements for varying checks?
3) how does “operation predator” fit into the statutory requirements?
I was called to return to my permanent residence and my bi-annual registration documents (that I had just updated three weeks prior) were gone through line-by-line to confirm that the information was current, correct, and complete.
I was fairly well-versed in what situation I was facing when I made my legal decisions in 2011/12. I was not aware that additional checks and information were going to be required above what the statutes and ordinances stated at the time if my arrest.
Excellent article. As expected, didn’t hear about the “operation” being over or the pitiful results on my local news (too many shootings to report). As JR pointed out, each new law passed to add more and more “requirements” is the elephant in the room. Every new law that imposes new conditions on registered citizens who have already been sentenced is in violation of ex-post facto, but nobody but advocacy groups care.
Jerry, I prefer to take a more optimistic view of the situation (as much as I can…)
I think there are people who care who are not affiliated with an advocacy group and those who do not even know the group’s exist – although they may be few. I also think that the facts are buried in misconceptions and ignorance. So… What do we do?
Educate. Educate. Educate.
I hope I’m right in my belief that the more restrictive these laws and ordinances become the more teeth they weekwill give to challenges of their constitutionality. Cracks are forming under the weight of these laws. FLHB1333 and IML present legal issues for government agencies. Perhaps we’ll be successful in some challenges. Perhaps not. But the education of the public is key to the changes we wish to see.
Great article, great statistics!