Response of NARSOL’s Rozek quoted in the Frank Report
All current research (including the U. S. Department of Justice) shows that when taken collectively, those people who have committed a sex crime, been caught, and served time in prison, have a reoffense rate of committing a new sex crime in the single digits.
That means over 90% never reoffend (commit a new sex crime). . . .
I also want to point out that, no matter the offense, the sex offender registry is ineffective at creating a safer society.
The registry has been in effect over two decades; many studies, both academic and governmental, have been done evaluating its effectiveness; it has failed miserably.
It does not predict who will commit new crimes as 95% of new sexual crime is committed by persons not on the registry.
It does not reduce re-offense; reoffense by those punished for an initial crime and then living in the community has held steady at, on average, 5% since long before the registry went into effect and is still at that percentage.
It does not reduce new offenses.
It does not protect children as virtually all sexual crime against children is committed by persons in their lives, their family members, peers, and authority figures, persons who are not on a registry.
Two of the most popular (with the public) restrictions it has produced, residency restrictions and Halloween restriction, have ZERO evidence, based on a plethora of studies, that they make an iota of difference or produce an iota of public safety.
If the registry fails to predict, fails to protect, fails to produce any increase in public safety, but instead goes against everything shown to increase public safety, interferes drastically in rehabilitation, and costs states many millions of dollars that could be spent instead on prevention programs that work and rehabilitation programs that work, WHY should the registry exist?
All current research (including the U. S. Department of Justice) shows that when taken collectively, those people who have committed a sex crime, been caught, and served time in prison, have a reoffense rate of committing a new sex crime in the single digits.
That means over 90% never reoffend (commit a new sex crime). . . .
I also want to point out that, no matter the offense, the sex offender registry is ineffective at creating a safer society.
The registry has been in effect over two decades; many studies, both academic and governmental, have been done evaluating its effectiveness; it has failed miserably.
It does not predict who will commit new crimes as 95% of new sexual crime is committed by persons not on the registry.
It does not reduce re-offense; reoffense by those punished for an initial crime and then living in the community has held steady at, on average, 5% since long before the registry went into effect and is still at that percentage.
It does not reduce new offenses.
It does not protect children as virtually all sexual crime against children is committed by persons in their lives, their family members, peers, and authority figures, persons who are not on a registry.
Two of the most popular (with the public) restrictions it has produced, residency restrictions and Halloween restriction, have ZERO evidence, based on a plethora of studies, that they make an iota of difference or produce an iota of public safety.
If the registry fails to predict, fails to protect, fails to produce any increase in public safety, but instead goes against everything shown to increase public safety, interferes drastically in rehabilitation, and costs states many millions of dollars that could be spent instead on prevention programs that work and rehabilitation programs that work, WHY should the registry exist?
Read the full piece here at the Frank Report.