Petition to Declare Public Sex Offender Registration in the United States a Violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
Today, approximately one-million people in the United States are forced to register as “sex offenders”. The label leads to stigmatization, separation from society, loss of employment, loss of housing and even exposure to violence at the hands of vigilantes. The stigmatization extends to the spouses, children, family, friends, employer and anyone that associates with the registrant. The isolation, shame, stress, fear of violence, loss of income and other psychological effects are experienced by the entire household.
When I completed my counseling in 1999, the therapist sent a document to my probation officer that officially stated that I was an excellent participant in the group and should be considered LOW RISK to reoffend. I still have the letter. I got of probation in 2002. None of this stated when people see me on the FDLE sex offender website. I also never violated any of the terms of my probation or any laws or requirements since. I feel like I’m a bad guy forever where people are always encouraged to think the worst about me! Nothing I have done since to have a successful and happy life means anything in terms of regaining my standing as a citizen. I’m always on the outside looking in.
Of course, problems with poles like this is it doesn’t give anybody an alternative and it only gives one example in the attached article that somehow justifies the poll. There should be a follow-up question or something which says that level level low-level offender would be x y and z as opposed to a higher level with LMNOP so that people know and have a basis. You’re still going to get people who think that all people under that label are the same of course. But some people want to understand the nuance too.
New York needs to scrap it’s whole registry. Someone challenged the registry a long time ago and the judge ruled that the registry was arbitrary and capricious however, they still keep it up [moderator’s note: no such citation found]. I know a guy who can’t get a job because he’s designated high risk and he hasn’t has so much never committed any offenses for over a decade or so. There are others who cannot be employed or even live in residential neighborhoods because people are always harassing them or trying to assault them. I know one person who has decided to go back to a vocation program and every 90 days he registers and like clockwork he gets harassed, threatened, or he loses contact with the people or students that are in his group because the program broadcast his name and picture every 90 days like he’s committing an offense and people are terrified because they see him as a person who keeps committing an offense and that’s not what the registry is all about. There needs to be a automatic coming off or lowering of levels, and the factor to get into court, although robust, needs to be a little more easier. I’ve read a court case about a judges who have ruled against a person on the registry because even though they may have not committed offense for 20 years, they failed to complete a program, or something of that factor. That is wholly unfair. Lower level people after a very short period should not even be on the list or the names being published, however, I see some legislation that wants everyone published irregardless of their status.
The registry is nothing but crap.
A simple Google search reveals;
It was likely Matter of Madison v Superintendent, Fishkill Correctional Facility (2017 NY Slip Op 27460). The court said DOCCS’s conclusion was “arbitrary and capricious” in applying SARA to a prisoner convicted of attempted burglary.
Legal Case Involving the Sex Offender Registry in New York
Overview of the Case
Yes, there has been a notable legal case in New York where a judge ruled that the actions of the Sex Offender Registry Board were arbitrary and capricious. This ruling was significant as it addressed the classification process of individuals as sex offenders.
Key Findings of the Ruling
The judge determined that the classification process did not adequately consider relevant factors.
The decision emphasized concerns about the fairness and reliability of how individuals were classified as sex offenders.
Implications
This ruling raises important questions about the procedures and criteria used by the Sex Offender Registry Board, highlighting the need for a more thorough and just evaluation process in such sensitive matters.
Isn’t copy and paste great?
That’s quite a bit narrower than what was suggested previously.