Source: The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/)
Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/12/AR2006051202025.html
Title: "Caught in a Neighborhood Web"
Date: May 13, 2006

Although I've looked into my local sex offender registry a few times (there are eight level two and three offenders within a few miles of my home), I have never been moved to action against any of the listed convicts. Personally, I'm torn between the benefits of tracking offenders of a notoriously predatory nature and the dangers of feeding people's fearful irrationality. From the front page of The Washington Post (May 13, 2006):

Eric Haskett was merely taking a nap in a car when he roused suspicion in a rural Frederick County neighborhood. A neighbor traced Haskett's license plate to an address once used by a registered sex offender.

Then his girlfriend's parents told him to scram; law enforcement officials, including three FBI agents, began investigating ....

"It blew me away that a federal agent was sticking a badge in my face. Three agents, dog -- like I'm the ringleader!" said Haskett, 28, of Mount Airy.

After allaying the concerns of several law enforcement officials over the past few weeks, Haskett also asked them what he could do to clear his name.

"They said the best bet is to leave the area," Haskett said.

Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/12/AR2006051202025.html)

The confusion apparently comes because Mr. Haskett lives at an address formerly occupied by convicted sex offender Donald M. Sanders. A vigilant neighbor touched off the controversy:

Stefani Shuster, who acknowledged in a telephone interview that she wrote the e-mail that put the events in motion, said she had the best intentions.

"I have a family to protect," said Shuster, 39. "My original e-mail was to inform people" ....

.... Shuster sent her e-mail to neighbors: "Many of you have probably heard over the past month of an older gray box-style car that has been hanging out at odd times in Summerfield. He was seen again between Cairo and Emmaline last week around 4:30-5:00 p.m."

The e-mail said the license plate number was given to police and traced to Haskett. The e-mail also noted that the Maryland Sex Offender Registry showed Haskett living at the same Liberty Road address as Sanders, the convicted sex offender.

"He (Sanders) is most likely living with and borrowing this car from Haskett," the e-mail said. "Please pass on this e-mail to as many people as you know in this neighborhood."

Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/12/AR2006051202025.html)

Given that in Maryland, license plate information is protected as private, some questions have come about as to how the information was obtained. Additionally, one may be given to wonder about the power of speculation: there was an address match, and nothing else, therefore this must be the sex offender and the registered owner must be complicit. Haskett's (and Sanders' former) landlord commented, "I see that convicted sexual offenders should be available on a police list. I can't see that people should have access to that list and hold that against him. There's too much of this throwing stuff around on the Internet."

This episode comes on the heels of a lethal incident in which two registered sex offenders were shot to death in Maine last month. One of the offenders killed was originally convicted of having sex with his underage girlfriend (he was 19, she was 15), whom he later married.

In addition to law enforcement, Haskett also had to answer to his girlfriend's mother. Ms. Scottie Burdette said, "Don't (mess) with suburbia, because we will chew you up and spit you out." One might wonder how to not mess with suburbia; it is, after all, the sacred land of conformity and "CCR" (covenants, codes and regulations). Burdette, of course, blames Haskett: "Certainly, he could check out a book from the library on dinnertime etiquette ... He's not a pimply-faced teenager. He could have come to the door that night like a grown-up."

Of course, Ms. Burdette's criticism might be taken to suggest she didn't like Haskett as a suitor for her daughter, but that would be mere speculation.

The sex offender registry is intended to protect citizens from a brand of criminal that is notoriously predatory and recidivist; with so much at stake, why does the system seem so cartoonish, recalling an old Hap Kliban frame titled, "For most of his adult life, God forced Carl to wear a lime popsicle around his neck"?

Here's a blast from the past:

Since my first recollection of the issue, sometime in my teens, the one constant regarding the debate of public release of convict addresses, such as we're discussing here, is that entire communities have risen up to agitate the situation. Demonstrators, provocateurs, assailants ... and all of these are the "good" people. There is a Hap Kliban cartoon entitled "For Years, God Made Carl Wear a Lime Popsicle Around His Neck." It is simply that ... a picture of a man with a lime popsicle around his neck. If that's all there was to it, then fine. But the people in the communities I live in are just itching for the chance to beat a man with his own lime popsicle.

Tiassa, "Sex Offenders" (http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=25453), 11.04.1999

Now it appears they're ready to beat other people with someone's lime popsicle.

(Really, I was just looking to see if anyone had posted that particular cartoon online; surprise, surprise, Sciforums is at the top of the list for "kliban lime popsicle" (http://www.google.com/search?q=kliban+lime+popsicle). Guess it's still a rare one.)

Despite underlying doubts about the legal propriety of sex offender registries, I am not prepared at this time to sack them. Perhaps I should be. To the other, though, is a little bit of rational consideration on the part of the frightened masses too much to ask? Can we possibly use properly a tool given us for "the children"? Or is it our destiny to toss it on the rubbish heap along with the rest of our children's futures?

If we teach fear, our children will learn to be afraid. If we proselytize fear, our children will learn to justify their fears.

'Tis a strange sympathy for the devil, but what would humanity be without wrenching new variations from the theme?
___________________

Notes:

Kunkle, Frederick. "Caught in a Neighborhood Web". Washington Post, May 13, 2006; page A01. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/12/AR2006051202025.html

Tiassa. "Untitled". Sex Offenders. Sciforums.com, November 4, 1999. See http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=1993

Is there any evidence that sex offenders once caught do NOT reoffend?
If it is the case that they all do or that the vast majority do, then once identified they should not live a free life again and remain imprisoned until an effective system is in place for ensuring they do not re offend.

Meanwhile most sex offences against children take place by family or friends of the family, ie the ones you trust!

Is there any evidence that sex offenders once caught do NOT reoffend?

In Washington state we use a three-tier classification. Level One offenders are unlikely or less likely to reoffend. Imagine that you and your partner were having sex in your bathtub, and your neighbor's child stacked up lawn furniture to peek in your windows. You end up being evicted, arrested and charged with endangering a minor or some similar charge. Convicted, you will be a sex offender and forced to register. Most likely, this would be a level one sex offense; your danger to children and the public would be considered low. I would not see you on the default maps in my local registry, but I think I could get your information.

One of the men killed in Maine recently ended up marrying his "victim". Because of the nature of his offense, people might get the wrong impression if he was classified as a level two offender; sure, he had sex with a minor, and it qualified as statutory rape under the law, but "what about love"? She, obviously, did not feel so victimized by his offense; she married him. I would consider him low risk for recidivism. Obviously, a young Canadian vigilante felt otherwise.

The issue of family and friends of family often represents a starting point; strategy and convenience, &c.

See Also:

Adams, Glenn. "Maine killings raise questions about sex offender registries". Boston.com (AP), April 17, 2006. See http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/04/17/maine_killings_raises_questions_about_sex_offender _registries/


I'm still looking for an NPR discussion of the issue in which they talked about Elliott's marriage to his "victim".

I think really sex offenders lists that the public can view are uneccessary and as you demonstrate dangerous! If as you say the less likely to reoffend ones are the ones in the public domain, then we should all remain vigilant against all regardless of entires on lists or absence thereof. As I said, most risk comes from those you trust. If level three's are the child rapists/murderers etc, then simply they should never be free, hence no need again for a registry.

Meanwhile what are the ages of elliot and his wife? I couldn't see it in the link.

Elliott was 19, as I heard, at the time of his crime; she was 15. I believe he was 24 at the time of his death, which would make his wife 20.

Elliott was 19, as I heard, at the time of his crime; she was 15. I believe he was 24 at the time of his death, which would make his wife 20.

shocking - 4 yr age gap and at this age too, not uncommon in Uk at all.

in my opinion
once a person has been tried and convicted and served there timed they have paid their debt to society and should be left alone.
it could very well be possible that the reason that ex-cons reoffend is because people will not let the old convictions die. the ex-con figures well if they will not let it die neither will i.

in my opinion
once a person has been tried and convicted and served there timed they have paid their debt to society and should be left alone.
it could very well be possible that the reason that ex-cons reoffend is because people will not let the old convictions die. the ex-con figures well if they will not let it die neither will i.

No, this is NOT the reason, having known many convicts (not sex offenders) the reason they reoffend is because prison is not such a big bad scary place that they thought it was and so risking going back in is not such a big deal, also as before, they assume they will not get caught second time round.
They live outside of society and will not conform to anyones rules but their own. Meanwhile everyone knows most sentances are inadequate, so serving your time in Uk is not a debt served it's a free holiday. Sex offenders will reoffend, it's like me saying to you, you cannot have sex with a woman ever again, try shagging dogs. It's in thier make up. Kids need to be protected.

oh dear looks like ameriaca is going back to the good old days of the cowboys and homesteaders where people were lynched without trial, most of the time their crime was minimal or they were innocent. there are nuch worse things to do than have sex with someone who is 15 and actually love. if they didnt love each other then they wouldnt have married. does it say whether the vigilante was doing the work for somebody or just thought that he would be the law himself. did he actually think that it would anybody any good. did he think that the young girl would be pleased? this is exactly why vigilante killings mostly stopped a long time ago. personally i feel that unless the sex offenders crime was serious then their details should not be released to the public.

I'm sorry I don't agree with you TDR, in my family I reasently had a cousin who has a long record of child sexaul abusining, his sisters, brothers, cousins, daughter, sons, the neighbors childeren, school mates, any child he took a liking to, I have seen the damage that is done in my own family, If I had knowen what was fully going on, even though he was undergoing theatment, I would have put the rope around his neck and kicked the chair out my self, this piece of shit was a coward who terrorised the weak and defenceless around him, but if you stood up to him he became a quivering pile of shit! no these less than human pieces of shit deserve no quarter or mercy in this world!!!!!

ps: he is now doing 60yrs in the state pen, and I hope he has a verry good acquaintence with being over a pomel horse!

yes but what if the cousin of yours was innocent, had his details released and was then murdered by a group of vigilantes, how would you feel then

Ms. Scottie Burdette said, "Don't (mess) with suburbia, because we will chew you up and spit you out."

Haha, that's amusing.

- N

DNA in the end didn't lie, and the trail of victems covered 40ty years, and on two ocasions he was caught in the act!

Is there any evidence that sex offenders once caught do NOT reoffend?
If it is the case that they all do or that the vast majority do, then once identified they should not live a free life again and remain imprisoned until an effective system is in place for ensuring they do not re offend.

Meanwhile most sex offences against children take place by family or friends of the family, ie the ones you trust!Like many of you I'd like to see a thorough study of that myself in order to make up my mind. What I have heard from sociologists is that the contemporary state of the art in rehabilitation is unable to rehabilitate the worst offenders and that it's almost certain that they will go right out and do it again. The rapists and the child abusers. They're just wired wrong and we seem unable to fix them. Even castrating them doesn't help, because it's not sexual release they're looking for but something else. They'll just violate their victims with a stick or a banana.

The problem is that we let the government make these decisions and as usual the government is a bunch of idiots. 18-year-old boys who have consensual sex with their 17-year-old girlfriends can end up in court for "child abuse" if the girlfriend's parents have a grudge against them. They may not go to prison but they'll end up on that list. I know a guy who actually had that happen to him and he's going to have to spend the rest of his life in a Blue State that does not publish its Sexual Predator list without first reviewing it manually and erasing "crimes" like this.

And even when it comes to non-statutory rape all rapes are not equal. Date rape by a young stupid boy with raging hormones, no learned respect for women, and a belly full of alcohol is just as traumatic for the victim as being raped by a stranger with a knife. But it's not the same for the perpetrator. The kid may very well be salvageable with a little maturation, some more competent parenting, and a conviction for a crime committed while drunk. To spend the rest of his life literally blacklisted and possibly even the target of a media-whipped feeding frenzy over the type of communal hatred currently in vogue does not quite seem like justice to me.