How Do Our Neighboring States Handle Sex Offenders?

---

3-2-15 Minnesota:

For more than two decades, Minnesota’s most dangerous sex offenders have been locked up a second time after serving prison sentences. They’ve been committed to indefinite detention in treatment programs.

Now, more than 700 sex offenders are suing the state saying that’s unconstitutional.

So we wondered: How do our neighboring states handle sex offenders? Do they get out? And what happens when they do?

Seven-hundred-and-nine of Minnesota’s worst sex offenders call Moose Lake or St. Peter’s treatment programs home.

Two have been granted provisional release in the civil commitment program’s 20-year history.

But when WCCO checked neighboring states, we found big differences in how they deal with their most dangerous sex offenders.

Legislature studies civil commitment, treatment for sexual offenders

---

12-6-2013 Florida:

If the Florida Legislature has its way, sexual offenders released from prison won't go back on the streets as quickly.

"In September, the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Committee on Children, Families and Elder Affairs met jointly to hear presentations from experts regarding sexual offenders and the civil-commitment process," said Sen. Denise Grimsley. Experts viewed current laws and suggested changes to enhance the ability to charge and convict any sexual offenders. Once their criminal sentence is complete, worst-case offenders can be civilly committed and treated.

"The key concept is that this is not additional incarceration for a punitive reason," said Sen. Cary Pigman, a member of the House Healthy Families Subcommittee. "Instead, this is a several-month-long and intensive behavioral modification effort to prevent sexually violent predators from victimizing again."

Time is one key, the 2012 Florida Prison Recidivism Study found: 16 percent committed new crimes within 12 months, another 11 percent within 24 months, and another 7 percent within 36 months.

The Florida House is taking a hard look at the state's civil-commitment process for sexual predators, with House committees working together on an overhaul. Any slack in the commitment process could be corrected in the 2104 legislative session.

"One of the things we are going to do is ratchet up some of the penalties on people who abuse children sexually, abuse seniors, abuse the developmentally disabled," said House Criminal Justice Chairman Matt Gaetz, R-Fort Walton Beach. "We're also going to make sure that when people get out of jail, we don't just release them back into the wild and hope for the best."

The process took another step forward as the House took up recommendations still being developed by Gaetz's criminal-justice panel.

Editorial: Keeping better track of sex offenders

---

9-7-2013 Florida:

It's been 14 years since the Jimmy Ryce law took effect requiring the state to examine convicted sexual offenders and decide whether they should be held in a treatment center after finishing their prison sentences. It hasn't proven to be a foolproof reform. The South Florida Sun-Sentinel's series "Sex Predators Unleashed" documents horrific cases in which rapists and child molesters were released from prison only to assault new victims — sometimes on the very day they were freed. The question at the center of the newspaper's investigation asks: Why were these men were allowed to leave confinement?

State lawmakers are calling for new mandatory minimum sentences, an expansion of civil commitment after criminal sentences are served, and other knee-jerk measures. But they aren't the answer, just as the Jimmy Ryce law wasn't the answer 14 years ago. There are other, less expensive approaches to improving public safety, including better monitoring of released sex offenders and enhanced treatment in prison and after release.

Since 1999, the Jimmy Ryce law has allowed the state to subject sexual predators to civil commitment after they have served their criminal sentence. The law was named after a 9-year-old boy who was raped and murdered in South Florida. Civil commitment seems to violate due process by confining people in anticipation of what they might do in the future. But the courts have found it constitutional, and Florida appears to be stuck with it.

Of the 3,000 or so sex offenders in Florida who are evaluated each year for civil confinement after serving their sentences, only a handful are considered dangerous enough to qualify. The Sun-Sentinel's investigation suggests that too many dangerous sexual predators are slipping through the cracks, but the system is not as broken as it first appears.

3,000 per year X 14 years = 42,000 released. News found 594 recidivists / 42,000 = 1.4% recidivism rate.

The newspaper's investigation found 594 instances over 14 years where a sex offender was arrested for another sex crime after release. That added up to more than 460 children molested, 121 women sexually assaulted and 14 people killed. Those are terrible crimes, but the recidivism rate for sexual offenders who were reviewed and let go was less than 10 percent. Florida's overall recidivism rate is 30.5 percent over three years, according to the Florida Department of Corrections. This indicates that a large percentage of sex offenders are not appropriate candidates for civil commitment.

Determining who is dangerous and mentally troubled enough to enter Florida's 720-bed sex offender treatment facility is not an exact science. But if standards for civil commitment are loosened, it will lead to costly and unnecessary confinements. The state has spent more than $450 million on this population since the law took effect, and there is no data on how effective the treatment has been.

What makes more sense is for Florida to do a better job tracking sex offenders after they are released. Since 2000, state audits have made that recommendation but no agency has been assigned to do it. Treatment should start in prison and help should continue after release. If the Legislature can find money for more confinement beds, it should be able to fund cost-effective, less restrictive alternatives. These are awful crimes that deserve more attention, but longer prison sentences that limit judicial discretion and more civil commitments to a "treatment facility" are not the answer. ..Source.. by Tampa Bay Times

---

Is Civil Commitment Legislation Based on False Premise?

---

2-27-2013 National:

“Sex offenders are more likely than almost any other type of criminal to repeat an offense, [Bacon] said….”
This appears to be the premise on which Sen. Kevin Bacon has built his bill, a bill that would allow the state of Ohio to civilly commit persons beyond the serving of their court-ordered sentence.

Repeating an offense—recidivism--is measured in many ways, and one must be extremely careful in reading the studies provided on sex offense recidivism. A well-done study and well-crafted report will show graphs and charts as well as textual information. It will break the studied population down into sub-groups and show results for all.  It will make clear the definition of “recidivism” being applied to each set of numbers.

General recidivism is a return to prison for any offense, most often parole violations. These can be high for registered sex offenders as the parole restrictions are many and often onerous. True sexual recidivism is often defined as an arrest for another sexual offense. A more accurate definition, one that honors the constitutionally protected assumption of innocence until guilt is proved, is a conviction for another sexual offense, and a thorough study and report will show both.

Regardless of how it is measured, regardless of how it is defined, regardless of how it is reported, there is one thing that sex offense recidivism is not, and that is higher than for "almost any other" offense.

In fact, the opposite of those words are more often found in a discussion of sex offense recidivism.

From a Missouri Supreme Court Judge in a January 2010 ruling:

[R]ather than assuming that the [recidivism rates of sex offenders] are high, one should look at the data. Of the five categories of felony offenders in Missouri’s correctional population – drugs, non-violent felonies, violent felonies, DWI (driving while intoxicated), felonies, and sex and child abuse – sex offenders have the lowest rates of recidivism. Their rate of recidivism after two years is 5.3 percent…(F.R. v. St. Charles County Sheriff’s Department, 301 S.W.3d 56; Missouri Sup. Ct. 2010).

According to the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) of the United States Department of Justice, "In New York State the recidivism rate for sex offenders has been shown to be lower than any other crime except murder."

The most recent study available for Ohio, a study of offenders released in 1989, shows recidivism rates for actual repeat of a sexual offense at the five year and the ten year follow-up periods between 5% and 8%; this is consistent with almost all other state reports, which fall between 2% and 10%. These states all fell at 4% or below: CA (2010); CN (2012); IN (2008); MN (2007): NM (2012); NY (2007) TX (2001); WA (2005).

An article in the Journal of Sexual Offender Civil Commitment: Science and the Law, 1, 141-149. (2006), “The Vilification of Sex Offenders: Do Laws Targeting Sex Offenders Increase Recidivism and Sexual Violence?” presents compelling evidence that civil commitment programs may actually increase the risk of sexual violence in the community.

Ultimately it will be both society at large and future victims of sexual violence who suffer because the expense of SVP programs is wildly out of proportion to their benefit. As more and more resources pour into SVP programs, the distortion in policy and resource allocation will become more and more severe. Society will suffer because of the resource drain, and victims will suffer because these SVP programs will draw more and more resources away from programs that address the great bulk of sexual violence in the community.

All communities have a responsibility to address issues of violence and harm to the public. Will not responsible communities with responsible leaders gather all of the evidence, both pro and con to a pre-held opinion, and craft legislation, laws, and policies based on facts, truth, and evidence-based research? In an issue as important as sexual violence, is not this responsibility both imperative and absolute? ..Source.. by RSOL

 RSOL promotes the elimination of sexual abuse and the preservation of civil rights for all individuals through the use of effective legislation based on empirical research. We envision sexual offense laws based on equal justice and respect for the dignity of all people, protection from retroactively applied punishment, and the establishment of fact-based laws and policies that protect our communities.

---

Treated sex offenders seldom re-offend

---

6-15-2008 Arizona:

Her nightmare started just after 5 p.m. Nov. 10, 1980.

She was taking a welding class at Pima Community College's downtown campus and had just pulled into the parking lot when Aaron Dean Davis ran up to her car.

"Lady, I just killed a man, get me out of here," he yelled at her as he pulled out a knife.

Davis forced her back into the car. They drove for miles. When they got close to the college's West Side campus, he forced her to stop in a nearby wash.

There, Davis beat and raped her. When it was over, he had her drop him off near Congress and Granada.

Davis was caught, convicted and sent to prison in August 1982.

With his sentence now up, Davis wants his freedom. The Pima County Attorney's Office is trying to make sure that doesn't happen.

For the past 10 years, Arizona prosecutors have had the power to have convicted sex offenders committed to the state hospital past the end of their prison terms if they believe the person remains a threat.

Once that happens, the only way out is to convince a judge he is no longer a danger.

There are indicators that a program that puts former inmates into the Arizona Community Protection and Treatment Center is having the desired effect on these most threatening of sex offenders.

Of the 104 men who have been through the program and released, two have been re-arrested. That compares to a 15 percent rate of repeat violations for sex offenders overall, according to Sergio Martinez, a forensic psychologist who evaluates convicts to see if they should be placed in the program.

But the security of keeping those sexually violent predators off street has a price. The Arizona Department of Corrections spends $61.74 a day for each prisoner. The cost to treat a sexually violent person in the state's Arizona Community Protection and Treatment Center is $325.71.

Since the first convict was committed under a new law in 1998, 110 such predators, all men, have been sent to the state hospital for treatment after the end of their sentences. Another 65 nearing their release dates are being evaluated for commitment.

The 104 who have been released spent an average of three to four extra years in state custody — the longest six years.

The process of having sex offenders committed starts at the state prison. When they are within 180 days of being released, prison officials send those they believe may require civil commitment to either Martinez or Dr. Barry Morenz, a forensic psychiatrist, for evaluation.

If they believe the defendant has a mental disorder that makes it "highly probable" he'll commit another sexually violent act, they notify the county attorney.

A hearing before a judge is held, at which the defendant's attorney can submit evidence from other doctors who believe his client isn't sexually violent. If the judge believes there is "probable cause" the defendant is a threat, the individual is transferred to the Arizona State Hospital for an evaluation by another doctor.

If that doctor agrees with the first, a jury trial is held. If a jury determines a defendant is sexually violent, he becomes a resident at the treatment center.

Martinez said being found sexually violent requires not just a conviction. In addition, the individual must be diagnosed with certain types of mental disorders and lack the ability to control his behavior, and the judge and a doctor must agree it is "highly probable" he will commit another sex crime.

Of the more than 600 prisoners he has evaluated in eight years, only about 5 percent qualify, Martinez said.

In Davis' case, Pima County Superior Court Judge Nanette Warner ruled Davis is a sexually violent person. But his attorney, Assistant Pima County Public Defender Donald Klein, is contesting her decision. A hearing is scheduled for June 23.

Once someone is committed, individual and group counseling sessions designed to help the "resident" understand what arouses him, how to manage his deviant thoughts and how to avoid those situations are mandatory, said Dan Montaldi, a psychologist and chief evaluator at the treatment center.

Gradually, "residents" earn more access to the community, although they may be kept under surveillance or required to wear GPS monitors — sometimes living in group homes, taking jobs or attending school.

While sexually violent people cannot be cured, the intensity of their deviant thoughts and their urge to act upon them can be lessened, Montaldi said, making them less likely to re-offend than those who receive no treatment at all.

"Treatment is one of the factors that can reduce the recidivism rate, but it depends on the quality of the program," Martinez said.

Everyone committed to the treatment center has the right to be evaluated annually under Arizona law, Montaldi said.

During those evaluations, prosecutors and doctors have to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that a resident's mental disorder hasn't changed. If they can't prove it, a judge must release that person.

Five times in the program's 10 years, doctors and prosecutors felt a resident was still dangerous and were overruled by judges, Montaldi said. Two of the five have been re-arrested, although neither for a violent sexual crime, Montaldi said. None of the five were Pima County cases.

On the flip side, Montaldi said there are residents who never ask to be discharged.

"There are a few who are well-behaved here, but they themselves feel they are a danger to the public and want to protect society," Montaldi said.

Deputy Pima County Attorney Kathleen Mayer, who once headed the office's sex-crimes unit, believes the program keeps high-risk offenders off our streets.

Mayer recalls one convicted sex offender who bragged in prison about committing thousands of kidnappings and rapes, including the pitchfork death of a 14-year-old girl. When it came time for him to be released, and he was going through the evaluation process to be committed, his DNA matched a San Francisco cold case involving a 14-year-old rape and murder victim, Mayer said. He was eventually convicted and sentenced to prison in that case.

Defense attorney Brick Storts said that when the state started committing sexually violent people, the program was "draconian," but it has improved a great deal since then. No longer is it run like a prison, Storts said.

In addition, prosecutors have become much more discriminating about whom they try to commit, Storts said.

Part of the change stems from Arizona and U.S. Supreme Court rulings limiting the number of people eligible for the program, such as a state ruling it must be "highly probable" the person will re-offend, not just "possible" or "probable."

In addition, more and more sex offenders are being sent to prison, but also being placed on lifetime probation, Mayer said.

If a sex offender made a plea deal agreeing to lifetime probation following prison, it would be ethically improper to seek a civil commitment, Mayer said. The offender is going to be monitored just as closely and required to seek treatment as a term of probation anyway.

Also, some prisoners are admitting they are sexually violent as part of a plea deal that guarantees them a shot at a less-restrictive program, such as being considered for placement in a group home, Montaldi said.

One of Assistant Pima County Public Defender John O'Brien's clients did exactly that, was eventually discharged from the program and has had no subsequent run-ins with the law.

"From his point of view, it works," O'Brien said. "He gradually earned greater freedoms, got to go on day trips and even got a job."

John Cooper, chief executive officer for the Arizona State Hospital, said Arizona is far more advanced than many other states in terms of treatment, assessment and integration of sex offenders.

Many other states are simply building more prisons, Cooper said. ..Source.. by Kim Smith Arizona Daily Star

---