Fact-checking registered sex offender information

By Sandy . . . WFMJ21 has reported on how the Trumbull County Sheriff’s Department has conducted a random, county-wide check on its residents who are on Ohio’s sex offense registry.

Perhaps inspired by the current political climate, I would like to respond to this piece in the way of fact-checking.

“Hundreds of sex offenders live among us across the valley.” False. Quite possibly thousands of sex offenders live across the valley. The number is unknown because between 95 and 96% of sexual crime being committed is by those who are unknown to law enforcement. A correct statement would be hundreds of persons required to register as sexual offenders live among us across the valley.

Several paragraphs, either explicitly or implicitly, say that these law enforcement sweeps are what keep those on the registry from reoffending. This too is false. A plethora of studies have been done showing that sex offender registries and their resulting law enforcement activity are ineffective as a public safety tool. This is true in jurisdictions where little to no checking on registrants is done as well as in Trumbull County.

“Deputies say their biggest fear is that an offender out of prison could re-offend.” Perhaps if deputies knew the statistics and the facts about child sexual offending, they would realize that their “biggest fear” is misplaced. The rate of reoffense for registrants across the board averages 5.3% according to the most comprehensive governmental study done of this nature, and additional studies show this figure has held steady for many years, both before registries were implemented and after.

“[Deputy] Molinatto would like to think that enforcement is helping to drive down the total number of offenders in the county.” What does this mean? Drive persons on the registry from the county? That is what it sounds like, and that sounds suspiciously like an attempt at banning.

WFMJ reports, “The unit sees a variety of cases that sometimes can involve someone a parent thought they could trust.” This gets only one Pinocchio. A change from “sometimes can involve” to “almost always does involve” tells a more accurate story. The statistics on this correlate nicely with those showing that 95-96% of offenders are not on the registry. The stereotypical stranger hiding behind the bushes waiting to grab a child from the park has been totally debunked. Child sex offenders are family members, peers, and authority figures, and these crimes are almost always committed indoors, often in the victims’ homes. This chart, compiled from FBI figures on juvenile justice, shows the reality of who child sex offenders are.

Sheriff Monroe’s narrative about child’s toys and coloring books being a tip-off that a registered person is reoffending furthers the impression to the reading public that everyone on the registry is a child sex offender out to get their children. How many of those identified as “sex offenders” are on the registry because they were 18 years old with 15-year-old girlfriends or boyfriends? How many are young adults whose convictions are the result of a teenager lying about her – or possibly his — age? How many were actually innocent and are victims of either mistaken identity or malicious lying? How many had an adult victim and no predisposition whatsoever to children?

And how many of the coloring books and toys belong to the children or grandchildren of the registrant?

From beginning to end, this piece shows a serious need for the Trumbull County Sheriff’s Department and WFMJ to do some research into the topics of child sexual abuse and the sex offender registry. Then they can provide their reading public with facts that can help them protect their children from harm.

This piece was sent to the journalist who wrote the original piece as well as the news editor of WFMJ. In spite of a following up email requesting that attention be given to the situation, no response was received.

Help us reach more people by Sharing or Liking this post.

One Thought to “Fact-checking registered sex offender information”

Leave a Comment

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone and language of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Refrain from comments containing references to religion unless it clearly relates to the post being commented on.
  • Do not post in all caps.
  • We will generally not allow links; the moderator may consider the value of a link.
  • We will not post lengthy comments.
  • Please do not go into details about your story; post these on our Tales from the Registry.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites.
  • Please do not solicit funds.
  • If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  • All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them. It will not be displayed on the site.

  1. Renee

    This deputy has a page full of falsehoods on the sheriff website. His statement in the article is just the beginning. I own a home in which a person forced to register is living. For the past 2 months he has constantly harassed, come to the home, went through my mail, beaten on doors & windows and most recently pried open the storm door breaking the lock. Russ believes ORC allows him to do this and that he must come into my home to see where the forced registrant sleeps.