Sunday, September 28, 2008

DPS boosts sex offender ostracization without reason

Via Crime and Consequences:
Texas Registry Posts Sex Offenders' Jobs: In addition to a sex offenders' name, home address, photograph and criminal record, the Texas Department of Public Safety is now posting their employers, according to the story by Brian Collister, of WOAL TV in San Antonio. The state is providing the employment information to allow the public to learn if sex offenders are working in jobs that bring them in contact with children. The link to the Texas registry is here. A therapist notes that the new information may cost some offenders the jobs they need for rehabilitation.
This is a foolish move by the Department of Public Safety, and one taken on the agency's own initiative, not because of any legislation directing them to do so. This decision by DPS makes it more likely sex offenders will not be able to successfully rehabilitate and successfully make their way in society when their sentence is complete.

From the beginning, when a later-exonerated man was pilloried in the Ashley Estell case as the prime example justifying the bill, Texas' sex offender registry has been based on faulty premises. Research has consistently shown that sex offender registries "increas[e] recidivism by registered offenders due to a change in the relative utility of legal and illegal behavior," making it hard to keep employment and function in society without harassment or ostracization.

Now DPS wants to reduce the chance sex offenders can be gainfully employed - for what reason (beyond a pure, cynical public relations ploy) I cannot fathom. There's certainly zero public safety benefit. It's basically an overt decision to increase the number of sex crimes in Texas. What is DPS thinking?

40 comments:

sunray's wench said...

If Texans dont agree with this, what should they do to get the decision reversed? Or is this another case of unaccountable individuals with more power than people realise until it is too late?

Anonymous said...

That's always the case in Texas GOP government. Of course, these are the same folks who were guarding the Mansion. The incompetents at HQ needed a victim to beat on. Makes them feel superior and all. God probably was talking to them. Of course, major crime all around them, and the goons maintain their deaf, dumb, and blind routine to real criminals in the legislature and the judiciary. Why do the PEC and TYC folks all get walks from prosecution? They must have paid for their sex.

Anonymous said...

"What is DPS thinking?"

I already miss Col. Davis. You notice Polunsky and Co. waited until he was gone to start causing problems. I bet this came from the board, not from Col. Davis' team.

FleaStiff said...

>What is DPS thinking?
They are thinking their budgets and bureaucratic fiefdoms will increase with this measure. And besides, it will be fun!

Don Dickson said...

No comment.

But I was amused to read earlier this week that the Michigan Supreme Court held that a man convicted of sodomizing a sheep was not required to be registered as a sex offender. Talk about a place "where the sheep are scared."

Anonymous said...

The Governor of Texas basically said to the FLDS, If you don't like being harassed, you can always leave. We don't want you here!.

Texans used to be proud of their State. Now they're forced to go somewhere else to get justice.

It is a shame because Texas justice could be so much better with just a little more thought and effort on the part of the citizens.

Anonymous said...

I'm glad that I took the "Native Texan" bumper sticker off my truck. I'm ashamed to be a Texan nowadays.

Anonymous said...

DPS is making money selling criminal data base information to web sites like Public Data. Public Data is off shore so they can't be held accountable for criminal violation of wrongful disclosure of criminal histories. DPS sells the data base with the knowledge the information will be used illegally inside the state of Texas. DPS feels free to violate the criminal law of the State of Texas. Why does the Attorney General of Texas put a stop to this criminal violation? A state official is guilty of a Class A Misdemeanor if they distribute Criminal Histories for any other purpose than law enforcement. DPS make a few bucks but they drive up crime costing the tax payers more in the long run not to mention the pain and suffering of human beings. It seems most of our state and federal officials are a lawless pack of criminals.

lowery.shirley said...

Listing employers on the registry is a requirement of the Federal Adam Walsh Act. States that don't comply will lose federal funding.TX was eager to get a head start
This is a vicious law. Many registrants are getting letters stating their registration period has been extended to life. People who had convictions back as far as 1952 and never had to register are being notified that they will now be added to the registry. Look at SORNA guidelines and maybe there will be additional information.

Anonymous said...

Are we forgetting these are sex offenders? What is wrong with you people? I say stamp a neon sign on their forheads and be done with it.

FleaStiff said...

>stamp a neon sign on their foreheads
Someone with a neon sign on their forehead will not be able to get a place to live or be able to find a job and will soon turn to alcohol and to re-offending because he has nothing to lose by it.

Anonymous said...

Let's not forget that a portion of the sex offenders are indeed innocent. If many of them could have afforded a great attorney they would not be where they are right now! Come on- We all know that Texas has the best justice system that money can buy! Let's not assume that all labeled sex offenders are guilty.

Anonymous said...

Are we forgetting these are sex offenders? What is wrong with you people? I say stamp a neon sign on their forheads and be done with it.

9/28/2008 11:30:00 PM


No, we are not forgetting these are sex offenders. We are also NOT forgetting that these are citizens of the United States. The act of banishment, expost facto law, and the like are what creates the air of hostility towards ALL Americans, not just sex offenders. Some of these 'sex offenders' were 18 y/o kids doing the deed with their 15 year old girlfriends. And besides that fact most on the registry have served their time. Would you like it if your DUI conviction was put on line YEARS after you were over and done with your sentence? Or better put it on line, then add MORE and MORE restrictions until finally you are again being put through sentencing? Think about what you said, as it shows ignorance, and lack of understanding as to the things to come.

DPS put this information online WITHOUT a law to back it up. They went out on their own and did this. So what is next, they begin making their own rules in which to stop or arrest you on the street or in your home?

Today it is sex offenders, tomorrow it will be you!

As a continuing note, does anyone know the penalty for NOT giving them the information? if there is no law allowing it, then there should not be a penalty for not supplying the info either right?

lowery.shirley said...

Yeah. It is a new crime and not a parole violation. In fact, it is a felony. TX DPS already collects employment info and we spent $1.3 million to put it online.
The only way to fight this is to fight against TX adopting the law, This would cost TX a little over $3 million dollars in penalties. I can sure you that it will cost many times that amount to implement it plus the astronomical cost to maintain it. Regardless of what anyone feels about sex offenders how many registries do we need and how many billions in debt are we willing to take on?

Jan Fewell said...

I have learned so much about what is going on with the sex offenders registry in the last several months. I am troubled by the number of "Romeo/Juliet" type cases where the boy is on the registry; I'm troubled that people are being added to the registry for "NON SEX OFFENCES" but are now considered "sex offenders." Recently I talked to 30 year old guy who became a registered sex offender at 19 for having consensual sex with a 15 year old and now he can't find a job. These guys are no longer on probation but will always be on the registry. Some of these guys should have come off the registry, but the State went back on their agreement with these boys. Most of these boys are now registered for life. It bothers me to hear that one of these boys lost a job when the employer found out they had been convicted of a sex crime. He had been told that he completed his "deferred adjudication" and it was not a conviction. When the employer found out about it, the employer fired him saying he lied on his job application. I was stunned to see "place of employment" pop up on the registry knowing how hard it already is on these types of "sex offenders."

But most of all, I'm troubled about the number of juvenile offenders on the registry. The same weekend DPS added "employment" to the registry, DPS also added the names of the schools for juvenile sex offenders.

Now the registry displays juvenile offenders, their exact age, shoe size, height, weight, address, name of school, along with a picture of the juvenile. Don't these kids deserve to be protected? A sexually deviant child seems to be a child who needs help, not ostracizing.

This practice of putting info like this out on juveniles is abominable.

Anonymous said...

WOW!! That is tuff stuff.

I guess that is just one more reason why you shouldn't sexually abuse people.

Anonymous said...

I am also an RSO with a DA. I agree that it is truth that Texas has time and time again gone back on its deal they made with all of with DA's. I have the paper stating that my probation was completed, case is dismissed, and all punishments and disentitlements are set aside, but yet, i am still on the registry. What can I do about it, nothing. Texas lies to us, to get us not to fight weak cases, telling us everything is gonna be alright. I should have fought the charge, They had the information from the 'victim' with her statement of the fake ID.

Not until the ID part came out were they offering a plea. I was tired of it, no money, and my attorney told me this was a great deal. NOT A GREAT DEAL FOLKS!

Did I do something wrong, yeah I should not have been so believing. and I should have put many facts together at the time, but at 27, I was still stupid.

I will live with this, and push it down the throats of the authorities whenever I can, but to include children on the registry and name their schools is just plain wrong. I thought the great buz line was " Think about the Children...".

I guess in this case, think about the children, as long as we don;t have a beef with them first.

Abbott needs to be impeached.

Anonymous said...

WOW!! That is tuff stuff.

I guess that is just one more reason why you shouldn't sexually abuse people.

9/29/2008 11:23:00 AM


Wow, I guess you should be thankful noone ever found out about you taking liberties with that drunk chick in high school, you cretin..

Anonymous said...

If Texans do not agree with this they should contact their state legislators immediately. No, this is not a good move and it will make Texas less safe when these people can not find/keep jobs. But Texas does not seem to be concerned about safety, we are concerned about looking tough. By the way, the new federal guidelines do not require this information to be made public just that it be collected. The Texas registry is not doing anything to make us safer. We can not even tell by looking at the registry if a guy violently raped someone or had a sexual relationship with his soon to be wife before she was 17. But as my friend says, "By golly, we know their shoe size."

Anonymous said...

Interesting info about the Adam Walsh Act someone posted and that may be some of the reason behind the stiff sex offender registry stuff.I have always been a victims right kind of guy but working in the juvenile justice system, I believe that the registry should only be maintained while the sex offender is under supervision on parole or probation. If the system releases them off of supervision, aren't we saying they're ok to be in society with others. Sex offender treatment has come a long ways since the registry was began.

I've seen so many people that can't get their lives back together because they are registered. Obviously, there may be those who are very dangerous to the public but there are many more on that registry who are registered for life who shouldn't be.

Anonymous said...

Well, this is absolutley ridiculous. They have to work and yes, I know they are sex offenders....but let's take a reverse look. TYC houses sex offenders and Collin County and TYC collectively INCORRECTLY registered a YOUTH as a sex offender and he now sufferes those scars. To date, the mother has not contacted me back but I am not sure its even been taken care of. So, the damage of registration for all to see, is that these people, maybe innocent (the innocence project) or victims of circumstances and will not loose jobs, and friends when trying to make a change. So, who is the real villian? And no, I do not support the wrong but somewhere, someone has to use there damn brains and realize they are out of the sytem and limited on where they can live, how they can live and work is limited and you don't think this will cause some butterfly effect?

MSLGW CEO said...

Federal Domestic Spending Bill Cuts Crime Funding Program by 67 Percent
State Representatives try to get the Adam Walsh Act, SORNA, sex offender registration notification act, signed into being in each state citing the loss of Federal Grant monies if their state does not comply.

But as Paul Harvey would have said, they do NOT tell you the rest of the story.

What little funding any state might have received, has been drastically cut. Leaving states which implement the Adam Walsh Act to ask all the residents of the state to agree to pay MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO FUND THE legislation, and only get back a few thousand dollars.

Texas Cost of Implementing SORNA ……..$38,771,924
Texas Byrne Money 2006……………………………….$14,045,713
Texas 10 percent of Byrne money……………………..1,404,571

Texas 67% Byrne cut leaves 33% or..............$463,508

Virginia determined that the first year of compliance with the registry aspect of SORNA would cost more than $12
million.3
• The first year of implementing SORNA would cost the Commonwealth of Virginia $12,497,000.
• The yearly annual cost of SORNA would be $8,887,000. Adjusted with a 3.5 percent yearly inflation rate,4 Virginia
would be paying more than $10 million by 2014.
• If Virginia chose to comply with SORNA, the state would spend $12,097,000 more than it would if it chose not to
implement SORNA and forfeit 10 percent of its yearly Byrne grant, a loss totaling approximately $400,000.5
As evidenced by these summaries, states can expect to incur significant costs as they attempt to comply with
SORNA. States should consider all possible areas in which increased expenditures will occur.
• New personnel
• Software, including installation and maintenance
• Additional jail and prison space
• Court and administrative costs
• Law enforcement costs
• Legislative costs related to adopting, and crafting state law
Read and view supporting documentation here
http://cfcoklahoma.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=155%3Afederal-domestic-spending-bill-cuts-crime-funding-program-by-67-percent-i&Itemid=1

Cat said...

"The state is providing the employment information to allow the public to learn if sex offenders are working in jobs that bring them in contact with children."

And here I had the crazy idea that it was the prospective employer's responsibility to check the sex offender database before hiring someone to work with children....
silly me.

Jan Fewell said...

To Anonymoous who said: "I guess that is just one more reason why you shouldn't sexually abuse people"

I agree, but I do not agree with the way the current laws are written. I do not believe that consensual sex between a teenager and a younger teenager is sex abuse, or the same as a 50 year old man who would prey on a 7 year old girl. I know the difference between a victim of child sexual abuse, and a willing participant in consensual sex. I am a victim of child sexual abuse. I am a mother of 3 girls. I know the difference and I find it a shame that people cant differentiate. The problem is if you don't know the difference, then you can't possibly begin to understand the difference in your so called "victims" and what a true victim suffers.

I strongly support carefully structured laws that will protect our children. I also believe that if a young child is acting out in a sexually deviant way, that child could quite possibly be a victim themselves and therefore we help them not plaster their names and pictures on a public database for anyone and everyone to see. Even for those offenders who are of concern, are we safe because DPS provides a list for our county with 100's of names and only 3 offenders may truly be dangerous but we don't know the difference. ALL on the registry are now being treated the same regardless of their "offense." Told where they can live, told they can't be around their own children or families, probation revoked for the most minor technical violations. And it doesnt really matter that many of these "offenders" pose no danger to any of us.

Anonymous said...

Jan,

I had a very technical and mind-numbing explanation as a response, but after reading yours, nothing else really needs to be said.

Thank you for a well thought out explanation.

Anonymous said...

WOW!! That is tuff stuff.

I guess that is just one more reason why you shouldn't sexually abuse people.

9/29/2008 11:23:00 AM


Wow, I guess you should be thankful noone ever found out about you taking liberties with that drunk chick in high school, you cretin..



LOL, you make alot of assumptions with your reply. Let me clarify my statement. I don't believe all sex offenders are the same. However, if you prey on children or you are convicted of a violent sex offense, I find it hard to have sympathy.

BJ said...

That is exactly the problem. Texas does not differentiate those who commit forced, violent offenses from young adults who have consensual relationships with willing teenagers even if they marry the victim. They are charged with the exact same offense and face the exact same punishment range and both register for life because both are considered "sexually violent offenses" since there is no differentiation in the charge. Now doesn't that enhance public safety and use our tax dollars wisely?

Jan said...

One last thing; there was a time I completely supported Registry. When my girls were little I thought convicted sex offenders should have flashing neon signs in their yards. I would have been perfectly okay with a big scarlet letter TATTOOED on the forehead.

I don't think that way at all anymore. Seeing the resources that our government puts into monitoring non violent/non predatory "offenders" I am certain by reducing the registry there would be plenty of resources left over for law enforcement to keep up with the dangerous offenders. We may have to accept the fact there will always be a registry, but if we don't draw the line, one of us, or someone we love could end up on it for some non sex offense.

Anonymous said...

That is our largest problem in Texas and other states. It's not just the violent offenders on the registry. Online chat is now a registerable offense, if it's explicit. You don't even have to meet up with someone before going to prison and you're always guilty before proven innocent these days with these people who think all sex offenders are rapists or child molestors, I'll not support those either, but a large portion of these people did not commit a violent crime and some had no victim at all! It has to change and we, as Texans, need to fix the broken-ness of the registry to SAVE our children!

Anonymous said...

There is a major issue with how we handle registries. First of all, the words "violent," "predator," "assault," "pedophile," and similar words are used arbitrarily. Lets say you have an 18 year old boy that sleeps with a 14 year old girlfriend, and it was fully consensual. The male will be charged with sexual ASSAULT, thus a VIOLENT crime (though no force was used) by virtue of her AGE ALONE. Then he'll be placed on the sex offender registry, likely as a high risk offender or PREDATOR, and virtually EVERYONE who views the registry pegs him as a PEDOPHILE. Registries are nothing more than tools for paranoia. Registries save no one. It hasn't made any impact on preventing sex crimes. Why? Because it doesn't address prevention at all! Yet the ignorant masses call for more registries. Registry Mania is spreading to the point where we will test EVERYONE for characteristics shared by sex offenders. Are you young? Single? Ever had depression? Then you may be targeted as a potential risk. www.oncefallen.com/RegistryMania.html

lowery.shirley said...

RSO's cannot fight this by themselves. They don't even have the power of a vote. We like destroying those we are pissed-off at even though we know none of the details. This will change when citizens from all walks of life get fed up with being scammed.
I will fight against the AWA in TX. I will fight to get the registry offline and back into the hands of law enforcement. I will fight to set up a citizen's oversight committee so there is always someone to keep watch.
You bet there is still hope for TX to blaze a trail out of this darkness. Determined citizens and lawyers who see winning as the only option. We neither condone nor support sex crimes but the governmental rape of the nation gets shrugged aside. Are we okay with this?

FleaStiff said...

>Seeing the resources that our government puts into monitoring non violent-nonpredatory offenders...

But those 'resources' would prefer to waste their time monitoring a nonviolent nonpredatory offender the same way a narcotics officer prefers to lecture schoolkids than kick down a door where suspects may be armed. Besides, if you have someone kickout the less likely to reoffend registrants and even one of them re-offends you have a public relations nightmare, so the cops and politicians are going to still say include everyone.

BJ said...

Being on the registry or not wil make no difference in whether a person reoffends or not. The lifetime registration should be for those who have committed forced, violent offenses, those who have committed offenses against young children, and those who commit another offense after being being punished the first time. Dangerous people are not those who make a msistake and learn from it. Dangerous people are those who have little regard for human life and no intention of following society's rules. even politicians should agree that to do other wise is a huge waste of resources.

Anonymous said...

CARLOS RODRIGUEZ A/K/A JOSE LUNA, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS
NO. 1164-01 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS 93 S.W.3d 60; 2002Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 165 September 18, 2002, The information made available to the public under the Alaska statute included the offender's name, address, color photograph, physical description, conviction information and employer addresses. Id. at 984, 987. Thus, the [*71] court explained, "the procedures employed under the Alaska statute are likely to make the plaintiffs completely unemployable. Alaska publishes the names and addresses of the registrants' places of employment on its sex-offender internet site, and makes it simple for users of the site to search for the presence of any sex offenders working at a particular place of employment." Id. at 987. In Texas by contrast, several items are exempted from public disclosure. Art. 62.08. The address of the registrant's employer is not included within the required registration information. Art. 62.02. In this sense, the Texas statute is considerably narrower in scope than the Alaska statute in Otte.

259 F.3d 979 The procedures employed under the Alaska statute are likely to make the plaintiffs completely unemployable. Alaska publishes the names and addresses of the registrants' places of employment on its sex offender internet site, and makes it simple for users of the site to search for the presence of any sex offenders working at a particular place of employment. By doing so, it creates a substantial probability that registrants will not be able to find work, because employers will not want to risk loss of business when the public learns that they have hired sex offenders. This disability is far more substantial than the one at issue in Hudson, which merely involved debarment from a single profession. Indeed, the breadth of the impact of the Alaska statute provides strong evidence that the statute's effect is punitive. See Myers, 923 P.2d at 1041 (sex offender statute that permits [**22] public disclosure of offender's employment information imposes an affirmative disability). The stigma of public notification, including the block address of the sex offender's employer, inevitably will make it difficult for offenders to obtain and keep employment. 18 See Doe v. Otte, 259 F.3d 979, 2001 WL 826671 at *6-7 [*56] (9th Cir., 2001) ("By posting the appellants' names, addresses, and employer addresses on the internet, the Act subjects them to community obloquy and scorn that damage them personally and professionally" and is "likely to make the plaintiffs completely unemployable. Alaska publishes the names and addresses of the registrants' places of employment on its sex offender internet site, and makes it simple for users of the site to search for the presence of any sex offenders working at a particular place of employment. By doing so, it creates a substantial probability that registrants will not be able to find work, because employers will not want to risk loss of business when the public learns that they have hired sex offenders.")

Anonymous said...

Registry Mania is spreading to the point where we will test EVERYONE for characteristics shared by sex offenders. Are you young? Single? Ever had depression? Then you may be targeted as a potential risk.

Even this information is incorrect, as most offenders are a member of the family or friend, so it should be
Are you married?
Do you have kids?
Do you enjoy the company of any children?
Ever thought you kids looked cute in their clothing?
If you answer yes to any ONE of these questions, you are a risk at sexually offending...

Sandra said...

Dear Sunray, If you disagree with this, then you need to write to the house committee members on "crimnal jurisprudence " on this issue. They can prevent DPS from doing this by passing yet another law! I spoke with Chairman Pena's aid yesterday. He told me "all sex offenders" have faulty thinking. I disagreed with him. Of course you and I know that people grow older,their brains grow, they change developmentally, have spiritual awakenings/healings, have a change of heart and some people who wear the label are actually innocent or never should have been to prison in the first place. Pena's aid stated that those who didn't deserve the title only had their lawyer or DA to blame. He said it's up to the people to vote the DA out of office. If you have something important to say: The House criminal Jurisprudence committe members are Aaron Pena, Allen Vaught, Debbie Riddle, Juan Escobar, Terri Hodge, Barbara Mallory Caraway, Paul Moreno, Paula Pierson, Robert Talton. Each of these members have their own web site with an address, and an email contact. The Senate has the same committe called "criminal justice". I haven't had time to down load the Senate members for you. But just head on over to 'Texas Legislature Online' and you can find what you need with a little search. They will be writing thousands of laws starting Feb 2009 so get your say in now and keep talking to them through April 2009. And vote your DA out of office. :)

lowery.shirley said...

lowery.shirley said...

AAAWA-American's Against Adam Walsh Act
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aaawa/

Grit's readers have provided so many comments and resources that it becomes impossible to go back and find a particular item. I quickly threw up this forum as a central location for collecting this data. Please help me to accomplish this by posting in both places.
If your information pertains to a certain state please advise us as to which state at the beginning of the title line.
Someone made the remark that we have figures on the financial aspect that our leaders probably lack.That simple concept is so familiar that it must be correct and it is something we can change.
Few people go to Austin to speak before the committee. It is nothing to be afraid of since it consists of the bored committee members and a couple of other people who are waiting to speak. Getting their attention is a challenge.An easy way to accomplish that is to take a couple of dozen supporters who will applaud, whistle and stomp their feet to show approval for speakers in our behalf. The puny attendance of speakers and complete void of supporters allows lawmakers to pass anything they please. Then it is too late.

Anonymous said...

>Seeing the resources that our >government puts into monitoring non >violent-nonpredatory offenders...


Do a search on the term "gangstalking", and you will find that this monitoring apparatus is often used as a harrassment against political dissidents such as antiwar activists. This is a throwback to the CointelPro days...

Anonymous said...

My friends like to play it and buy aoc gold. If you have money to buy age of conan gold, you will find it is very useful. Earning conan gold is not so hard. Try your best and then you can get it. I buy cheap aoc gold, just because I like it. So simple the aoc money is.

Tim said...

I know this is a very old thread but it caught my attention. I am a 36YO RSO that was involved with a minor in consensual sex that was in a bar in the wonderful state of Texas which according to state law she would need to be 19 or have a parent with her. I recieved 10 years adjucated deffered probation at which time i was told that i would nolonger have to regester.. I was a Sgt in the US Army with a awsome record in special ops. i was dishonarably discharged where i lost all VA benifits. On a positive note i was awarded full legal coustody of my three children by child services who were totally aware of my entire situation. If a sex offender truly wants to make a better life for them selves it is possiable with a lot of hard work but the state constantlly adding more restrictionscome all makes it hard. i welcome all comments good or bad as long as you can not be rude or disrespectful. i will check this thread regularly and respond to any posts im sorry about my spelling errors please dont comment about them