|
|
Forum: In the News
Thread (Discussion): [Grand Forks Herald] Released sex offenders: Are there holes in the system's safety net? - justice upside down
Message 122647
Introduction
Posted by admin
on Dec 03, 2003 04:59 PM | Also by admin
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: N/A |
Discuss the article Released sex offenders: Are there holes in the system's safety net?, by Kris Jensen, which appeared on Grand Forks Herald on December 03, 2003.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
Message 122660 (In Reply to Message 122647)
Posted by Silverthorne
on Dec 04, 2003 01:41 AM | Also by Silverthorne
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Arizona,
Country: United States |
This is what pisses me off. Some stupid politician harping a tragedy for personal gain
""Of the people incarcerated who are Level 3, it's a relatively small number that are referred out for civil commitment, but with sex offenders, the recidivism rate is very high," Betzold said. "Many people who deal with these individuals say that, an arsonist grows out of it, even murderers, because the object of their anger is gone. "
"Recidivism is very high". ??????
He's ignored every study thats come out apparently . Then again politicans arent required to tell the truth are they?
Silverthorne
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (122647)
Message 122678 (In Reply to Message 122660)
Perspective
Posted by dp1
on Dec 04, 2003 01:20 PM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Silver, It looks like he was talking about level 3 offenders. I don't know specifically what level 3 is but if I had to take a wild guess it would the the worst ones....the ones with more than one offense or the most horrific crimes. When speaking about those specifically they are the ones that reoffend the most. It wasn't meant to be a slam against level 1 or 2 people. They aren't the ones being considered for civil action.
DP1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (122660)
Message 122699 (In Reply to Message 122678)
Posted by Silverthorne
on Dec 04, 2003 08:19 PM | Also by Silverthorne
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Arizona,
Country: United States |
Yes but he didnt specify that. He just used the generic term "sex offender". Hell I'm surprised he just didn't say "pedophile".
Silverthorne
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (122678)
Message 122707 (In Reply to Message 122699)
And Your Point?
Posted by dp1
on Dec 05, 2003 04:53 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
"Yes but he didnt specify that. He just used the generic term "sex offender". Hell I'm surprised he just didn't say "pedophile"."
Silver,
So where's the crystal ball in determining which sex offenders, pedophiles, perverts, or pedosexuals will offend or reoffend? I can understand the frustration with labels. But, you make it sound oh so horrible that people are afraid of child molesters or rapists and treat them all with caution. I for one would like to know the magic in being able to forecast reoffenses. How would anyone know that the first time offender won't end up being a Jeffery Dahmer? Even polygraphs can't go there.
DP1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (122699)
Message 122717 (In Reply to Message 122707)
no crystal balls
Posted by LostTime
on Dec 05, 2003 07:58 PM | Also by LostTime
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Wisconsin,
Country: United States |
There is no sure way to predict. The justice system, however is supposed to work by using facts and truths, not assumptions and exaggerations. It is supposed to err on the side of innocence. More and more it is being perverted to punish people for what they might have done (lowering the standards of proof by allowing hearsay evidence and worse in trials) or might do. It is wrong. I agree there should be stiff penalties for those who break the law and even more for those who reoffend. But not for those who are playing by the rules. Also the whole system of lumping all sex offenders into one class is wrong. (DP1 please elaborate if you can point to a valid reason for ALL sex offenders to be considered high risk). While a risk assesment is not foolproof there is no call for treating a porn hound exactly the same as a power rapist.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (122707)
Message 122731 (In Reply to Message 122717)
Reply for LT
Posted by dp1
on Dec 06, 2003 04:53 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
“(DP1 please elaborate if you can point to a valid reason for ALL sex offenders to be considered high risk). While a risk assesment is not foolproof there is no call for treating a porn hound exactly the same as a power rapist.”
LT,
This is only my interpretation for what ever it’s worth. My first issue is with risk assessments. I have almost no use for them. I’ve been in the business for 15 years and have seen at least 5 different assessment tools all of which are completely worthless. I picked up a case file the other day to review it for termination. I noted that it was classified a medium risk. He had NO priors and was arrested for one grand theft and plead out to a misd. Petty theft. Considering we only have felony cases one would think that a simple petty theft would be the most minimum risk of all minimum cases we deal with. So my issue is with the criteria, which is set in the program for the computerized risk assessment program. A human being decided what parameters to set and boy did they not have a clue!
With every change in risk assessment I noticed there seemed to be a hidden agenda in the background lurking. At one point we were trying to create a new rank with a much higher pay grade. This is when the big media hype was in vogue for sex offending. The State ran with that and talked about creating slots for specially trained officers to supervise this incredibly high-risk population. They changed the entire risk assessment process to reflect way more high-risk offenders to show how needy we were. They got the new position (we call them specialists) after all the hype since people wanted special P.O.’s keeping them safe. Every year when we have a budget crunch they change the risk assessment process to adjust the numbers. For example, I am employed as a high-risk officer (specialist). They pay me to supervise 40 high-risk cases. No more and no less. High Risk can he anything they decide it to be on whatever day they want depending on the needs of the department or the public. For now, high risk means sex offenders and early release offenders (parolees). This can change tomorrow. Personally, I don’t care since I topped out the salary for Probation Officers.
So the term “High Risk” can mean different things to different people. From the Corrections standpoint I see all sex cases as much more difficult and much more riskier than all others. It’s only because of the complexity, media attention and the severity of each crime committed not necessarily the volume of crimes, which are associated with property or drug crimes. So from a management standpoint, if I wanted to budget for more P.O.’s I would want to classify all sex cases high risk then divide by 40 and get my number of slots needing funding.
Now as far as the civil commitment process. It’s anyone’s guess as to who are the worst of the worst. We are fooling ourselves if we don’t factor in the availability of bed space. For example, if we funded 100 beds for commitment and we have 1,000 sex offenders up for release this year you bet your bippie the top 10% will get free room and board. Whatever system works, convinces the public, and creates the least amount of law suites.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (122717)
Message 122992 (In Reply to Message 122647)
way to go SOAB
Posted by myoung
on Dec 12, 2003 03:08 PM | Also by myoung
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Pennsylvania,
Country: United States |
This is why I am fed up and disgusted with the system. If they labeled him a level 3 he is identtified as an SO with a very high likelihood of offending again (propensity for serial behavior). If he has a criminal past they are probably taking into consideration that his crimes may be escalating in their severity, that he is a repeat visitor to the court system and that there is a likelihood for him to commit any crime again and again. The sex offender assessment board is a joke and a half. I don't think all those psychiatrists can make any assumptions about the future behaviior of a criminal minded person. You can guess that they may reoffend but why not err on the side of caution so that we are all safe out here......
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (122647)
Message 123031 (In Reply to Message 122731)
Posted by orolan
on Dec 13, 2003 01:06 AM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
I like your assessment of "assessment tools". Total hogwash, if you ask me. As you pointed out, they are invented by men, men who may or may not have an agenda to follow. You are a much better judge of a person that you supervised's reoffense risk than any column of 0's, 1's and 2's.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (122731)
Message 123044 (In Reply to Message 122992)
justice upside down
Posted by LostTime
on Dec 13, 2003 11:02 AM | Also by LostTime
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Wisconsin,
Country: United States |
"Better that ten guilty persons escape justice than one innocent suffer,"
"innocent until PROVEN guilty"
These are cornerstones of law in our land. I feel a lot of tension and anger when I see how far we have strayed from the constitution in the past few years. Miranda has become irrelevant. 4th, 5th, and 14th amendment rights are ignored when they don't facilitate the goals of the people they are meant to protect us from.
How can it be right to punish someone for a crime that has not happened? Maybe we should lock you up today because you might become a first time offender tomorrow?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (122992)
Thread
122647, admin, Dec 03, 2003 04:59 PM [Introduction]
122660, Silverthorne, Dec 04, 2003 01:41 AM
122678, dp1, Dec 04, 2003 01:20 PM [Perspective]
122699, Silverthorne, Dec 04, 2003 08:19 PM
122707, dp1, Dec 05, 2003 04:53 AM [And Your Point?]
122717, LostTime, Dec 05, 2003 07:58 PM [no crystal balls]
122731, dp1, Dec 06, 2003 04:53 AM [Reply for LT]
123031, orolan, Dec 13, 2003 01:06 AM
122992, myoung, Dec 12, 2003 03:08 PM [way to go SOAB]
123044, LostTime, Dec 13, 2003 11:02 AM [justice upside down]
122993, Rejected
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
|
|
|
