(Weekly Update #235)
Dear Members and Advocates,
One month ago, we made an announcement that we thought was radical. We announced that the Florida Action Committee was modifying our position to clearly and unambiguously state that we seek to abolish the registry. No more “advocates for reform” no suggestion of “baby steps” or “chipping away”, no coddling the audience. Only: the registry needs to be abolished because it doesn’t work. If baby steps come along the way, that’s great and we’ll take them, but our goal is to abolish the registry and we’ll keep working until we reach that goal.
As radical as we thought that would be, and as concerned as we were about backlash from other advocacy groups or within our membership, the push-back was practically non-existent. Response to the announcement ranged from very strong support and “yeah, that makes sense, how can we start talking about that?” to a very few objections. Their reasons for objecting were not given. But even the loss of one member is concerning to us, so we are once again addressing the rationale for the decision, and the footnotes provide the references to the supporting evidence.
When addressing any aspect of sex offender registration, we need to back up and ask the question, “why do we have this thing in the first place?” To begin that discussion, it’s important to know what the registry’s purpose is supposed to be, how the registry is supposed to achieve that purpose, and who is supposed to be benefiting from this thing. To end that discussion, it’s important to know whether the registry worked out the way it was supposed to. In this week’s update we’ll give you that answer, and if you don’t feel like reading more, the answer is NO!
According to the United States Department of Justice, sex offender registration and notification programs (which are a system for monitoring and tracking sex offenders following their release into the community) are important for public safety.[1] The registry’s purpose is to protect the public,[2] particularly children, the elderly and other vulnerable populations[3] from sexual abuse.
So, according to the government, this is an effective monitoring and tracking tool that prevents people from being sexually abused, and that benefits children and other vulnerable groups. But is it? Is it really an effective monitoring and tracking tool? Does it really prevent people from sexual abuse? And does it really benefit our children?
Monitoring and Tracking. At present, there are 81,752 people on Florida’s Sex Offender Registry.[4] Of that number, 1,028 absconded, 19,239 are incarcerated, 3,340 were deported and 709 are dead. That accounts for 29.4% of the list.
Of the remainder, 26,969 are on the Florida Registry but reside in another state or country. These people who moved out of Florida (or merely visited here but will forever remain on the registry) account for another 33% of the registry. What does Florida do to monitor and track these people who account for one-third of its registry? If the answer is nothing, their continuing presence on the list undermines the US DOJ’s stated purpose that it be a monitoring and tracking tool.
Put another way, only 37% of the people on Florida’s sex offender registry are actually in the community. That’s ridiculous! How can Florida’s registry be a useful monitoring and tracking tool if two-thirds of the names on it are a distraction? It’s not a directory or notification of who to watch out for. Florida’s sex offender registry is more like a shell game where you have a one in three chance of finding someone that is actually in the community.
Protection from Sexual Assault. If the sex offender registry was effective at preventing sexual crimes it would be one thing, but a meta-study analyzing more than 25 years of research found that the registry does not reduce sexual or non-sexual recidivism. Not at all.[5]
This isn’t news. The aforementioned study analyzed decades of earlier research and tracked hundreds of thousands of people on the registry. This is not a hypothesis or an aberrant finding. It is a scientific fact based on numerous studies, that the sex offender registry does nothing to make the public safer or prevent sex crimes!
To the contrary, the registry provides a false sense of security by ignoring the fact that more than ninety-five percent (95%) of sexual offenses are committed by someone not on the registry.[6] As to those who are on the list, studies show that registered sex offenders become more likely to commit crime when their information is made public because the associated psychological, social, or financial costs make crime more attractive. The consequential employment and housing instability caused by registration increases recidivism[7], absconding, addiction and other societal problems.
Benefiting Children. Media and political rhetoric about child sexual abuse is largely responsible for the false public perception people have about the registry[8] and sex crimes in general. In Florida, this rhetoric and the support behind it is amplified by magnitudes because of a certain father-daughter/lobbyist-senator team that controls sex offender policy in this state. They have been perpetuating the “it’s not a matter of if, but when” myth for their own self-serving purpose, for years.
Each year, despite the obvious conflict of interest, Senator Lauren Book votes to award her own charity, Lauren’s Kids, millions of dollars in Florida taxpayer money.[9] Lawmakers go along with it because her dad is one of the most influential lobbyists in the state and a huge political donor. Among his client roster is Geo Group, a for-profit company which contracts with the state to provide prison and correctional services – a huge beneficiary of the bills Senator Book introduces.
This implied suspicion is not intended to question Senator Book’s sincerity when it comes to protecting children – just many of her policies. Equally questionable is the motivation behind these “multi-day, multi-agency, task force operations” where thousands of law enforcement officers are paid millions of dollars in overtime each year to crack down on people who (often unknowingly) overlook a benign registration requirement that would not be unlawful under any normal circumstances, except that the target is on the registry.
The whole scheme begs investigation into whether this narrative of harms reflects the welfare of children, or the interests of law enforcement agencies and organizations owned by (or clients of) the people advocating for them, who profit handsomely off this narrative. The studies show, conclusively, it’s not the children.
So why do we still have this thing? We started this dialogue with the question, ‘why do we need this thing in the first place?’ and we now know that we don’t. It might have been well intended when it started off, but today it’s a costly and destructive failed policy. Plain and simple.
Knowing that, let’s conclude this dialogue with the question, ‘so why do we still have this thing?’ That answer is simpler – Because it’s politically popular and it gives a misinformed people the illusion that they are safer. That’s why, despite the voluminous evidence demonstrating the registry is ineffective, this thing still exists.
With all that said, political popularity is not a legitimate interest sufficient to overcome a constitutional infirmity, and “feeling” safer does not equate to being safer, especially when that feeling is a false sense of security.
For the above reasons, the registry needs to be abolished!
Sincerely,
The Florida Action Committee
Footnotes:
[1] https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/sex-offender-registration-and-notification-act-sorna [2] https://smart.ojp.gov/somapi/chapter-8-sex-offender-management-strategies [3] https://smart.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh231/files/media/document/final_sornaguidelines.pdf [4] https://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/publicDataFile.jsf [5] Zgoba, K.M., Mitchell, M.M. The effectiveness of Sex Offender Registration and Notification: A meta-analysis of 25 years of findings. J Exp Criminol (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-021-09480-z [6] https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/231989.pdf [7] Levenson, J. S., Ackerman, A. R., Socia, K. M., & Harris, A. J. (2015). Where for Art Thou? Transient Sex Offenders and Residence Restrictions. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 26(4), 319-344. doi:10.1177/0887403413512326 [8] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2017/03/09/the-big-lie-about-sex-offenders/ [9] https://www.floridabulldog.org/2021/05/new-senate-democratic-leader-lauren-book-conflict-of-interest/ANNOUNCEMENTS – MARK YOUR CALENDARS
Next Monthly Membership Meeting – Thursday November 3 at 8pm ET. Call 319-527-3487. Topic: Long-Term Care for Aging Registered Citizens with Guest Stephanie Jerstad PhD, Millersville University. Trouble connecting? Text CALL ME to 319-527-3487 to received a call back and be connected to the meeting.
See Calendar of Events – Keep up with Meet-and-Greets in your area, Support groups, Membership Calls, and other events. For questions and more information contact the Membership Team; [email protected] or call 833-273-7325,Option 1.
Click Here for Calendar, and double click on the event to view details and RSVP instructions. Just some of the upcoming events below.
Sat Oct 22 – Hernando/Brooksville Meet FAC reps Joel and Robb -2-4pm. For location RSVP to [email protected] or call 833-273-7325 Option 1
Sat Oct 22 -Sarasota/Manatee Meet FAC Reps Jennifer and Chris -1-4pm For location RSVP to [email protected] or call 941-500-4706.
Sat Oct 22 – Duval/Jacksonville. Meet FAC Reps Brad and Cindy for a Pot Luck dinner 3:00-5:30pm For location RSVP to [email protected] or call/text (904) 300-0109.
Sat Oct 29 -Lee County Meet-and-Greet has been Canceled. We hope that local members are safe and have the resources and support that they need. For assistance or just need someone to talk to, reach out to your FAC representatives [email protected] or text/call 941-315-7914
Sat Oct 29 – Orange-Seminole Meet-and Greet with a special guest and discussion on Civil Commitment: Intent vs Reality- Apopka (Orange County) – FAC is hosting the visit of a research Sociologist from University of South Carolina, Greensboro in preparation of his research on Civil Commitment. He is interested in meeting and talking to persons that have knowledge and experience with the Civil Commitment Center in Arcadia FL. Former residents, family members, professionals are invited to join us to identify issues/concerns, understand the intent vs reality of the system, and to identify the areas of research that need to be studied to support changes. For location and details RSVP to [email protected] or call 833-273-7325,Option 1.
Become a County Coordinator. The only requirement is your desire to HELP us organize your county. If you are interested in joining the County Coordinator Team, leave message at 833-273-7325, Option 1, or email [email protected]
Letter-Writing Campaigns – If you would like to participate in sending educational information to specific decision makers in Florida, please contact [email protected]. Volunteers must be willing to proudly identify themselves by using their own name and return address on the letters.
SOME HEADLINES FROM THIS WEEK
Call to Action: Support Gainesville’s move to roll back residency restrictions.
The City of Gainesville is considering rolling back the sex offender residency restrictions to the State Statute (1,000 feet) from its current 2500 feet. FAC supports this move and we ask our members to share their support with the city commission. Please click on the…
At least 269 K-12 educators arrested on child sex crimes in first 9 months of this year
Nearly 270 public educators were arrested on child sex-related crimes in the U.S. in the first nine months of this year, ranging from grooming to raping underage students. An analysis conducted by Fox News Digital found that from Jan. 1 to Sept. 30, at least 269…
UK: Dozens of sex offenders removed from register
Lincolnshire Police have removed 72 people from the Sex Offenders Register in the last five years. Those sentenced to more than 30 months for a sex-related crime can be required to register with police for life. But in 2010 the Supreme Court ruled offenders should…
ACSOL: Amended Complaint Filed in SORNA Regulations Lawsuit
Source: ACSOL An amended complaint was filed in federal district court yesterday in the lawsuit challenging SORNA regulations which became effective in January 2022. The amended complaint adds three plaintiffs using the pseudonyms “John Does 2, 3 and 4.” The amended…
With Unity Comes Change -Get Involved and Volunteer Today!
Florida Action Committee
www.floridaactioncommittee.org
833-2-REPEAL 833-273-7325
I am a parent and my son (50) was so unfortunately caught in a police sting after being at a bar – then intoxicated was “chatting” on the internet – sites are to be for 18 and over…….in lesser content – the very worst day of his life, life altering and for us all. Yes, an attorney, but future days look bleak. Looking for emotional, helpful support…. Where do you turn?
A very admirable and honorable position, scientifically and logically sound. *But—– *
As noted in the article, a lot of people, powerful connected people, personally make a lot of [taxpayer] money off of the registry. If not directly, then indirectly.
Until and if you find a way to counter all that $$$$$$$, the registry will not go away. That’s how the system works. (Sigh)
I agree 100% with this position. However the problem is the State has been using the Registry as an alternative to incarceration and that is not so commonly discussed and something the public has not caught onto yet Because of course the State considers the registry punishment and uses it as a way to continue to monitor people, I’m sure the State would agree that about 5% of those on the registry would have never been sentenced to anything less than life if it weren’t for the registry. Further, every new law, every harsher restriction is focused on the 5%. As far as total abolishment of the Registry, we’re stuck because the State is stuck. You think the public is ever going to agree to the State releasing those 5%? That’s why you sometimes hear State officials say that we should feel lucky because at least we’re out of prison – they are referring to the 5%. In fact whenever anyone talks about the Registry they are thinking of the 5%. It is the consequence of being on the same list that contains predatory pedophiles. Whether it be 5%, 1% or .003%, we can’t ignore that actual dangerous people are on the Registry. What is our response to that? Just ignore it and fight for them too? It seems that’s what we’ve been doing and it serves at the sticking point with the public. When we have an answer and solution to that or when we become willing to acknowledge this conundrum we will have come a long way in convincing lawmakers and the public to get rid of the Registry for good.
See, I used to believe that the Registry did not contain people who were convicted of forcibly raping, with penetration small children; that the punishment for such serious crimes was always life in prison and that our fight against the registry did not affect those convicted of such serious crimes. Sadly, I was proven wrong and it is this fact that we as an organization must confront. I dare say for us and our cause moving forward, it is the elephant in the room.
Thanks for letting me express solely my opinion on this matter.
The issue is simple.
Registries do nothing to even slightly hinder any future crimes. Anyone who is listed on a Registry (i.e. any PFR) will commit a crime in the future if he/she wants to. Listing a person on a Registry is useless. If that person is my neighbor I have no idea if that person is more or less dangerous than any other neighbor. I can’t truly protect my family without treating all of the people the same. This country has seen literally millions of examples of that. You can ostracize and avoid every single PFR and you haven’t protected anyone unless you are doing the same to everyone you know.
And completely overlooked by the naive people who live in fantasyland and support Registries – the Registries make almost everyone more dangerous. I’m certain that if you list a person who is the “worst of the worst” that you make that person a magnitude more dangerous than if you did not list the person. I know for a fact that being listed on the Registries has caused a person to murder people, including innocent children.
I think the simple fact is that Registries just make people feel good. It doesn’t matter much that they don’t work and increase crime. The a**holes of Amerika just want it.
The overwhelming majority of people who forcibly rape small children, if they don’t receive life sentences at least receive sentences long enough to seriously hamper their virility and possibly their mobility. So sure, the point survives; but just barely.
‘actual dangerous people are on the Registry. What is our response to that? Just ignore it and fight for them too?’
rpsabq raises some commonly asked questions.
I think our responses are:
How does the registry identify which people are actually dangerous?
If we know which registrants are actually dangerous, why do we believe a registration scheme would stop them?
We don’t fight for dangerous people, we fight for the constitution. And the constitution will stop working if we only allow it to protect people we’re comfortable with.
The registry is ineffective, period. It’s ineffective as to all people, whether dangerous or not. It’s not like a magnet that only works on metal.
There are dangerous people on the registry and there are dangerous people not on the registry – that’s not the point.
Donald Smith (who abducted, raped and killed Cherish Perrywinkle) was on the registry but the registry didn’t save Cherish. Educating her mom to not let Cherish go off with someone she just met, might have saved Cherish, but nobody thinks public awareness programs might work or required education for parents and children might help.
The lies will become increasingly outrageous and desperate when the jobs that SORNA provides are threatened.
“It’s not meant to be punishment.”
“it’s not meant to shame”
“It’s not meant to dehumanize.”
“it’s a deterrent that keeps them from re-offending.”
“It’s not perfect.”
“It’s all we have.”
“It’s a valuable public tool.”
LOL, all of their arguments are rooted in “appeal to emotion” and fear, not real-world stats, logic and peer-reviewed evidence.
They are protecting a boondoggle that gives aid and comfort to people that don’t even NEED IT. Everyone benefits from the registry except those that are forced to be on it.
Totally correct – it is a “feel good” for the ignorant masses but the registry actually causes more sex crimes such as the most common which is being abused by someone the victim and/or their family knows. In other words NOT A STRANGER or NOT SOMEONE ON ANY Registry either.
So while the ignorant masses think that the authorities are watching all the perverts they can ignore everything else – this false sense of security allows those close to their child the opportunity to do what they want more easily.
No one wins – not the public nor any children. Certainly not those used as scapegoats on this stupid registry.
Well, these is actually one winner and that is politicians who exploit parent’s emotional weakness and manipulate it for their own gain – such as Lauren Book.
There’s nothing quite like pushing at an open door is there?
This is a very good summary of the reasons why we made this change and should have made it a long time ago.
As things move forward and we get more ‘persuadables’ used to the reality that abolishing the registry will not turn the world into a scene from Caligula, we need to turn our gaze toward other achievable goals…such as modifying the state’s insane sex laws and even more insane sentences.
That won’t be a comfortable conversation, but neither was calling for the registry to be abolished 15 years ago.
It needs to be abolished. But it won’t be. Not after McGuire.
Convince me otherwise and you’ll brighten my day.
I no longer see a path to abolition in our lifetimes. All we can do is chip away at selected provisions and play defense against further expansion.
whether it will or will not be wont change our goal.
Has any thought ever been given to trying to reach out to John Walsh? His son was practically at the heart of the creation of the registry. I believe he is sensible and he has a great deal of political influence. If he were to begin to advance FAC’s goal and purposes, I think some real changes in law could be made. Just a suggestion.
Kyle, if you would like to propose an approach and the text of a correspondence, FAC would gladly try anything, though I think it’s a longshot to get John Walsh to buy into abolishing the Adam Walsh Act.
As a side note: Walsh is SORNA, not the creation of the registry. That was the Jacob Wetterling Act and Patti Wetterling has already shifted her position on the registry. SORNA is basically a re authorization of the registry.
I would suggest contacting SpeakerBookingAgency at 1-888-752-5831. They can schedule a booking with John Walsh. Perhaps FAC could book him for a virtual event whereby FAC could coordinate its own panel of speakers to have an open discussion with him on registry issues. Even if he did not support FAC’s position, he may provide information/contacts as to where FAC could effectively direct it’s resources. It’s a start.
Kyle – if you would like to spearhead an effort to look into the viability of this project, please take the lead. I’m not sure that FAC has funds to hire John Walsh to speak.
John Walsh lacks credibility these days for a variety of reasons, mostly circling around his daughter all but calling him a charlatan in public.
That bastard has made a career out of his son’s murder.
You really think he wants anything to do with “sex offenders” other than use them just like politicians for person gain – NO!
I support this new mission statement and refinement of strategies and efforts!!!
You nailed it!!!!!!! Awesome, and Thank you.
EXCELLENT – THANK YOU…
Excellent piece an I applaud FAC’s position. Frankly, I would have argued that change should have been made years ago. But no more grumbling. I’m glad FAC has finally seen the light.
However, I would have added one thing. Law enforcement continually calls the registry a “useful tool.” Challenge them to find one single crime apart from registry violations that the registry ever played a role in investigating – not prosecuting, investigating. And if they do (very unlikely), ask them what information the registry provided that couldn’t be found anywhere else.
Another FAC original masterpiece from our fine volunteer journalists! And an example of why I always look forward to FAC Weekly Updates in my in-box.
Now, one common mistake made here that I would like to re-direct. We say that 95% of sexual offenses are committed by someone not on the registry. Have you ever noticed that whenever we cite this figure to the public, someone understandably is quick to point to this as evidence that registries work! Registries prevent registrants from re-offending!
So this figure is not wrong, but too narrow to make our point. The GOOD news is that the truth is broader than this. Specifically, 95% of sexual offenses are committed by someone who has never even caught a felony conviction! Check out re-offense rates from prior to the advent of public online registries and you’ll see what I mean. It’s not registries that are keeping people from re-offending, because their introduction made no difference in re-offending!
So, please, repeat after me, 95% of sexual offenses are committed by someone who has NEVER BEEN CONVICTED.
Someone feel free to fact check me on our research page but I’m almost positive that this is correct.