FAC Weekly Update 2025-10-14-Expose the Myth of Frightening and High
Weekly update for October 14, 2025. This is recording number 333.
Dear Members and Advocates,
When the Union County ordinance described sexual offense recidivism rates as “alarmingly high,” it raised an obvious question — what does that even mean?
There is no legal or scientifically accepted threshold for what constitutes a “high” recidivism rate — whether “frighteningly high,” “alarmingly high,” or simply “high.” These terms are subjective, rhetorical phrases rather than empirically grounded standards. Yet, in almost every ordinance, the findings and legislative intent cite to “high” recidivism as the justification for passing harsh, lifelong restrictions against persons forced to register as sex offenders.
Researchers have repeatedly pointed out that such language — especially “frightening and high” — originated not from data, but from a single, unsupported sentence in a U.S. Supreme Court opinion (McKune v. Lile) that itself cited a 1998 magazine article, not a scientific study. That phrase was regurgitated in the landmark case Smith v. Doe (2003) that is continuously cited to in most court decisions on the constitutionality of sex offender laws. That sentence and the statistic (“as high as 80%”) has since been debunked by decades of empirical research, including studies by the U.S. Department of Justice, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, and numerous peer-reviewed meta-analyses showing that sexual re-offense rates are actually low. Typically in the 3–10% range and markedly low compared to most other crime categories. Even the author of that 1998 magazine article has admitted that it was taken out of context and not based on any actual data.
If the word “high” doesn’t have a set numerical meaning in law or science, what exactly is it supposed to mean? Since it isn’t used as a technical or statistical term, it has to be relative to something. Dictionaries define “high” as “above average” or “more than normal.” So, logically, describing re-offense rates of sex offenders as “high” should mean they’re higher than the re-offense rates for other types of crimes. You’d think that would be true — but it isn’t.
Let’s look at real data and real-world impact. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), about 10,000 to 11,000 people die each year in crashes involving a drunk driver. That’s die as in they are dead. Studies from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) show DUI recidivism rates between 33% and 50%, depending on the state and time period measured. So if a 3–10% re-offense rate is considered “frighteningly high,” then something five to ten times higher should logically be panic-inducing—or, to put it bluntly, “pee-your-pants-scared-s%tless high”.
We can all agree that getting killed in a drunk driving accident is bad. No parent wants that to happen to their child. Yet we don’t see county after county passing ordinances preventing drunk drivers from “travelling through” certain areas for the rest of their lives even “if it saves just one child”. If “high” recidivism would be the justification, and getting killed in a motor vehicle accident is the impact, isn’t there a much stronger argument for ordinances targeting drunk drivers or drug dealers?
I think it’s a fair question: if an “alarmingly high” rate of re-offense is the justification for passing laws that restrict constitutional rights in the name of public safety — yet years of empirical evidence, study after study, and even the original source of that claim have all proven it false — shouldn’t that be enough reason to revisit those laws? Texas death row inmate Robert Roberson was supposed to be executed this week. He was convicted of murdering his daughter in 2003 after experts opined that she died of ‘shaken baby syndrome.’ Last week, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted Roberson’s request for a stay of execution under Texas’ junk science law, which allows defendants to challenge their convictions where science is debunked. Because of the “evolving medical research on shaken baby diagnoses” the Court couldn’t justify the execution taking place.
If courts are willing to halt an execution because the science used to justify it has since been debunked, then how can we, as a society, continue to uphold laws built on a foundation of misinformation? The “frighteningly high” myth has caused immeasurable harm — stripping people of their rights, tearing families apart, and perpetuating fear-based policies that have no basis in fact. This is not a small misunderstanding; it’s a grievous injustice that has shaped decades of legislation and public perception. It’s time for every advocacy organization, every researcher, and every person who believes in truth and fairness to unite behind a single, coordinated mission: to expose and dismantle the false narrative that continues to justify these unconstitutional laws.
Words have power. The words “frightening” and “high” have been weaponized to sustain a system that punishes far beyond what justice or safety require. Together, we must reclaim that narrative — not just for those on the registry, but for the integrity of our laws and the credibility of our justice system. We call upon all our members, all our sister organizations, and all their members to expose the myth publicly by sharing this information with your local news stations and lawmakers.
It’s time to stand together and say what should have been said years ago: fear is not evidence, and fiction is not a foundation for law.
Sincerely,
The Florida Action Committee
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Great article, well stated! This is an issue I’ve alluded to for many years. Every law enforcement officer, lawmaker and court officer should be forced to read these FACTS. Our entire justice system regarding the SOR has been hijacked by a single, unsubstantiated, off-the-cuff remark made 27 years ago. It’s high past time to embark on a public education crusade to expose the false claims and true failures of the registry, and finally restore justice to millions of registry victims and their families.
Thanks Bob. Please take the suggestion and forward the article to your local politicians and five of your local news stations. Invite them to contact [email protected] if they would like a comment or access to any of the citations referenced in the weekly update (though many are hyperlinked).
If we can get just 50 out of our 3000 members to take the half hour to send out some emails, there’s a good chance we’ll get some attention. If nobody does that, we’re just preaching to the choir.
I want to stay on topic, so with that said I read and get the frame of mind that it’s about fear. Putting fear into people to gain ground for figures to reach a good place in their careers. I have been home for almost two years and I went to a job interview today and talk to a guy. He wanted to hire me told me I am just what he needed look forward to have me on board. No paperwork was filled out he had no info on me,but my name on my caller id from calling him. Home for one hour and I got a text say sorry I didn’t know about your recent arrest, recently meaning 16 years ago. He told me I don’t think you will work out here.
He had my name from caller id and looked me up of corse I would have told my background when I filled the app out. It’s been years since I looked at myself on line and what it informs and I was shocked. I’m not sure if I can put my charges on here but they are not violent but what they label me as I really don’t blame the guy he should have a open mind but reading the words they label me as is not me at all. They make it sound the worst they can to fear people. I own up to my actions but my label isn’t my actions
Jay
Back when I was on probation, my probation officer went with me when I applied for a job to make sure I was treated fairly and I got every job I applied for while on probation. With her standing up for me, that made all the differences because she would tell the manager that I would not give them any grief and if I did, she would violate me and send me back to prison.
On a side note, there is a verse in the bible that says, “Where one door closes, another one opens”. Basically, never give up or quit trying. That goes for F.A.C and all of us, we have to believe we will eventually get a victory. A mountain is hard to climb but once you make it to the top, you have success.
You know what is really funny about this?
If you ask what are the numbers of repeat offenders as being the same person and no one can specify repeat sex offenders.
A thief reoffends within 3 days of getting out lockup. A drug dealer or user it is within 4 hours after release. White collar crimes get reoffended while still in lockup because they say it is not a crime to use other people’s money. But how often or how long does the one time sex offender re offends
Another one kidnapping your own children because the spouse sought a different judge and didn’t tell the court that they lost in a different jurisdiction they need to get rid of that registry all together and put the spouse in prison
I would like to ask these counties, sheriffs and other officials to provide “LEGAL” proof of the High and alarming amounts of recidivism. I would like to know who that one guy is that keeps re-offending and causing the rest of us grief (Sarcasm)
I mean come on, guys like me, it has been almost 40 years since my crime, and yet we are all punished for the actions of the less than one percenters who re-offend? And, how many of those arrests are for paperwork errors or forgetting to register aunt betty’s car when she occasionally stays at your house for a week.
Has law enforcement really sunk that low that they have to make up arrests? Same thing with stings, where no real person was met other than law enforcement, but those arrested potentially more time than some of us got for actually having a real victim. And what is up with saying none of us will ever be cured, trusted from urges? (YES I am ranting but it has to be said)
Murderer of supposed sex offender running for sheriff… https://nypost.com/2025/10/13/us-news/dad-charged-with-killing-teen-daughters-rapist-running-for-sheriff/?utm_campaign=october14morningnote&utm_medium=email&utm_source=iterable&utm_content=morningnote
How can someone who murdered someone become a sheriff? And secondly, if he gets appointed, good God imagine the power he has to harm others with a free pass as Sheriff. We all think that sheriffs back in the 1950s were scary and bad, but there are a lot of small towns and counties, especially in the Florida panhandle where the prisons are, where law enforcement rule with an iron fist and get away with it.
Odd that is we murdered someone, we would go to prison or get the death penalty, but they either justify it by saying they were defended themselves, or the bury the person in the woods and call it a cold case with no leads of their whereabouts.
On a final note, on the second prison they moved me to, I almost lost my life due to four corrections officers who knew my charges and came in to beat me. God intervened and a call came out on their radios just as they were entering my cell that a riot was happening in the yard. After they left, the Chaplin came by to check on me, and I begged him to call my parents, and he did and they called the warden and got me transferred to another facility.
If they had killed me, all of them would have made up a lie that I attacked them or something and since I would have been dead, no other proof. LOTS of that going on in the panhandle prisons and they coordinate with the Sheriffs to make sure everyone is on the same page.