I am a little familiar with the FDLE Sex Offender site so I was not too surprised with the findings. There are 75 registered sex offenders within a 2-mile radius from my apartment complex. Out of the 75 offenders, three of them are females, including a former high school teacher who engaged in sexual relationships with one student. The age of the offender’s range from their late 20’s to their early 80’s. Thirteen of those are sexual predators and four are multiple offenders. The map shows that most offenders are located to the west side of the University of South Florida, surrounding the low-income areas near our campus. It is very frightening to know how many sex offenders are just within a 2-mile radius, it makes me very uncomfortable. Every …show more content…
A few occasions the daughter of my friend was being called by an old man offering her candy on her way to school when she notified her parents, they located the man in the FDLE Sex Offender Database and were able to inform the police. It is an easier way to monitor these people and to reduce their chances of committing these types of crimes again. It is very hard to determine if a sexual offense took place when there is no forensic evidence that justifies the act. In the trial of professor Polikoff I would have voted not guilty because even though there is circumstantial evidence, it does not prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact that the victim was dating a different man and admitted to voluntarily kissing the professor raises suspicions that will make most people question her credibility. The case was tough because there was evidence that supported both the victim and suspect arguments, but rape was not proved beyond a reasonable doubt which would make me vote for not …show more content…
Almost an entire country judged the Duke Lacrosse team based on the testimony of someone who presented herself as a victim in this case. Since her accusations became public, the three Duke Lacrosse players were guilty in most people’s eyes. The fact that she was acting accordingly to a “victim” made her accusations credible. The social class of the Duke players made most people believe that because of their economic status, those young men believed they were above the law and above people of a lower economic status. The film also proves the power of news media and how it can impact the view of people. The news media all around the country were constantly targeting the players. People tend to rely on the media and sometimes we get sucked in to believe everything they say. Lastly, the film demonstrates the immense power that prosecutors have in the United States. Mike Nifong knowing that the accused players were innocent, he still went after them and was determined to ruin their life for personal gain. It may not be common, but there is a chance that we have more lawyers like Nifong in the United States, lawyers with no integrity that have no respect for liberty and justice. Prosecutors have the power to ruin the life of anyone, whether they are guilty or not. In the Duke lacrosse case, the accused players were fortuned to have the economic resources to defend themselves because if they
This essay begins with the introduction of the Risk-Needs-Responsivitiy Model which was developed to assess offending and offer effective rehabilitation and treatment (Andrews & Bonta, 2007). The R-N-R model “remains the only empirically validated guide for criminal justice interventions that aim to help offenders” (Polashek, 2012, p.1) consisting of three principles which are associated with reductions in recidivism of up to 35% (Andrew & Bonta, 2010); risk, need and responsivity. Firstly, the risk principle predicts the offenders risk level of reoffending based on static and dynamic factors, and then matched to the degree of intervention needed. Secondly, the R-N-R targets individual’s criminogenic needs, in relation to dynamic factors. Lastly, the responsivity principle responds to specific responsivity e.g. individual needs and general responsivity; rehabilitation provided on evidence-based programming (Vitopoulous et al, 2012).
...aker, J. (2007). Public perceptions about sex offenders and community protection policies. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 7(1), 1-25.
Three white males of Duke University’s lacrosse team were accused of sexual assault charges against a woman they hired as an escort. Michael Nifong, former district attorney, was eventually removed, disbarred, and jailed because of his criticisms towards the players. Nifong made various false accusations public to the media and worked alongside a DNA lab director to withhold exculpatory evidence. The State Bar filed two rounds of ethics charges and North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper was forced to take over the case. Ultimately the case and all charges were dropped because of the prosecutorial misconduct performed previously by Nifong. Inconsistencies between evidence and suspect interviews found by Cooper proved the members of the team to be not guilty. Their names were cleared from the legal books but the men were suspended from the team and publically humiliated by the fabricated
Sex offender legislation has been encouraged and written to protect the community and the people at large against recidivism and or to help with the reintegration of those released from prison. Nevertheless, a big question has occurred as to if the tough laws created help the community especially to prevent recidivism or make the situation even worse than it already is. Sex offenders are categorized into three levels for example in the case of the state of Massachusetts; in level one the person is not considered dangerous, and chances of him repeating a sexual offense are low thus his details are not made available to the public (Robbers, 2009). In level two chances of reoccurrence are average thus public have access to this level offenders through local police departments in level three risk of reoffense is high, and a substantial public safety interest is served to protect the public from such individuals.
... offend, the results show that knowing where an offender lives does not reveal much about where sex crimes, or other crimes, will take place, that result calls into question the rationale for creating registries in the first place.” The researcher concludes by stating registries do little to increase public safety.(Agan)
Although they may be out of jail, they cannot be considered free. They are unable to make their own decisions: where they can work, where they can live, and how they can live their lives are all under control of the government. These people look the same as everyone else, but underneath the mask, lay a title they cannot shake. These people are sex offenders. A sex offender is defined as anyone who has committed a sexual crime. These crimes range from serious crimes, like rape, to minor offenses, such as urinating in public, or under age consensual sex. All sex offenders are placed on the registry and are required to follow a careful protocol. Registered sex offenders are paired with a Community Corrections Officer (CCO) who oversees and supervises the offender's actions. Many restrictions are placed on the offender, and although the laws can vary from state to state, there are some basic restrictions that apply to every offender. Some of these restrictions include: a sex offender cannot move without the permission and approval of their CCO, they can only live and work in certain areas, they cannot own any firearms, their personal computers are monitored and controlled by their CCO (many websites are blocked, including pornographic content), they are not allowed to take or consume any mind altering substances such as drugs or even alcohol, and they are required to get regular counseling (“Rules”). Currently there are 747,408 registered sex offenders in the United States. Some states such as Delaware and Oregon have a higher concentration of sex offenders (500 per 100,000) where as Pennsylvania has the lowest concentration of sex offenders (94 per 100,000) (“Sex Offender Statistics”). Due to the inefficiencies ...
In today’s society, juveniles that commit a sexual assault have become the subject of society. It’s become a problem in the United States due to the rise of sexual offenses committed by juveniles. The general public attitude towards sex offenders appears to be highly negative (Valliant, Furac, & Antonowicz, 1994). The public reactions in the past years have shaped policy on legal approaches to managing sexual offenses. The policies have included severe sentencing laws, sex offender registry, and civil commitment as a sexually violent predator (Quinn, Forsyth, & Mullen-Quinn, 2004). This is despite recidivism data suggesting that a relatively small group of juvenile offenders commit repeat sexual assaults after a response to their sexual offending (Righthand &Welch, 2004).
Cashwell, C. S. and Caruso, M. 2014. Adolescent Sex Offenders: Identification and Intervention Strategies. [e-book] Sage Publications. 1. http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/C_Cashwell_Adolescent_1997.pdf [Accessed: 14 Mar 2014].
That’s why people argue that the sex offender registry does more harm than good. They paint a picture of these people that’s sometimes not accurate. When people see an offenders name on the list automatically they change the way they view you as a person. For example, Ed Gordon was a man convicted of a sex crime because he was 30 years old dating a young teen that was half his age. He was charged with statutory rape.
The implementation of controlling where they can and can’t live will keep children safe and it will help the child sex offender from having any ideas of hurting another child. If the child sex offender does not live near schools or places where kids reside they won’t have the urge to commit sex crimes. Policy makers who make registration and notification mandatory are keeping tabs on child sex offenders so that they won’t re-commit these crimes: “sex offender registration and notification policies are primarily aimed at promoting community awareness so that community members can protect themselves and their children from victimization” (Bratina 202). While these registries and notifications are in place, child sexual abuse is a topic that every child and parent should be educated on for their safety and for better communication between each
Sex offenders have been a serious problem for our legal system at all levels, not to mention those who have been their victims. There are 43,000 inmates in prison for sexual offenses while each year in this country over 510,000 children are sexually assaulted(Oakes 99). The latter statistic, in its context, does not convey the severity of the situation. Each year 510,000 children have their childhood's destroyed, possibly on more than one occasion, and are faced with dealing with the assault for the rest of their lives. Sadly, many of those assaults are perpetrated by people who have already been through the correctional system only to victimize again. Sex offenders, as a class of criminals, are nine times more likely to repeat their crimes(Oakes 99). This presents a
Englewood’s attempt to virtually outlaw the ability of registered sex offenders to live within its borders suffered a well-deserved rebuke three years ago when a federal judge overturned the ordinance because it was so restrictive. As Judge R. Brooke Jackson rightly observed, “Few sex offenders are incarcerated for life. Most will at some point return to the community, and there must be a place for them to live.” Unfortunately, Judge Jackson’s opinion was not the last word in the case, which was eventually dismissed after a complex series of rulings.
Child sex offenders are real world issues,
Bedarf (1995) has cited that there has been a vast surge in popularity for this technique of dealing with known sex offenders. This would be reasonable as society's opinions of sexual offence is very negatively perceived. Furthermore, suggesting that a strength for this method is that society, to some extent, has the upper hand. Therefore, it is correct to believe that if community notification is protecting the public, such as detecting offenders earlier, then it must be beneficial to recidivism rates. (Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2005.)
The Miami-Dade County sexual offender and predator search website helps users find sexual offenders and predators near their home or school. I live close to an elementary school. I searched my address on the Miami-Dade County sexual offender website and I was surprised to see how many sexual predators are living close by! I remember when I was in elementary and middle school when we would get a list of sexual predators with pictures and addresses to give to our parents, that was scary to