Judge correct to uphold sex-offender residency law

The following appeared in the Palm Beach Post, Letters to the Editor section. The Sex Offenders Solutions Network posted a reply (which follows) to this article.

Judge correct to uphold sex-offender residency law

Thursday, June 07, 2007

I read with great interest two articles, "Residence limits keep sex offenders on move" (May 19), regarding sex offenders, as well as "Sex offender law passes muster, judge rules" (May 22), involving the judge's decision in that matter.

I am an outspoken advocate on behalf of victims of sexual violence. My daughter was sexually abused for many years by a nanny who now is in prison. I also serve as pro-bono counsel to the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence. I am responsible for proposing and successfully lobbying for many changes in Florida law over the past six years. I have made many appearances before city and county commissions on the residence restrictions the two articles were written about.

I don't ever hold residence restrictions out as an end-all cure-all related to stopping sexual offenders and predators involving their sexually deviant behavior; however, I do believe that the adoption of residence restrictions is a piece of the puzzle. Elected officials have a responsibility under the Constitution to protect the health, safety and welfare of all citizens and not simply those of the criminal element of our society and, in particular, those who have been convicted of sexually deviant behavior.

Zoning laws in Florida long have required that bars and taverns be 2,500 feet or more from churches, schools, synagogues, day-care centers and the like. Why would anyone find fault with requiring sex offenders to live at least 2,500 feet away from where we know children congregate? While I recognize that these sexually deviant individuals can get in their car and drive anywhere, and we cannot stop that under the Constitution, we don't need them peering down from their homes and apartments onto the playgrounds, schools, day-care centers and school bus stops at our children so that they can scout out their next possible victim. I don't care if they have to live under a bridge or if they have to live somewhere outside Florida. I do care about protecting our children.

This is not emotional, knee-jerk advocacy; it is well-thought-out. I do not agree with Lynn University Assistant Professor Jill Levenson, who is cited in the May 19 article, as she sees these issues only on behalf of the sexual offenders and predators. I have read and researched as much as most experts, and I know these laws will do something to help protect our children. It is the aggregation of federal, state and local ordinances that make our communities safer.

I commend Palm Beach County Judge Paul Damico for understanding the rights of all citizens as it relates to protecting everyone's health, safety and welfare under the Constitution as he ruled the county ordinance constitutional.

RONALD L. BOOK

Aventura

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/content/opinion/epaper/2007/06/07/letterfile_0607.html



Reply by the Sex Offender Solutions Network:


Judge correct to uphold sex-offender residency law – revisited:

Contrary to what some and Judge Damico believe, there is not one shred of evidence that Residency Restrictions, as currently written, has saved a child.

While many believe these restrictions work, the experts in Law Enforcement, Sex Offender Management, and Therapy do not. A recent Amicus Brief filed in the Supreme Court of Ohio, was submitted by the following organizations: the Jacob Wetterling Foundation, the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA), the Iowa County Attorneys Association, the Iowa State Sheriffs & Deputies Association, the Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault and the Rosenthal Institute for Justice at the University of Cincinnati College of Law.

The amicus brief argues three things: (1) that there is no evidence that sex offender residence restrictions protect children from sexual abuse; (2) that such laws are driven by fear, not facts; and (3) that these laws potentially increase the risk of harm to children by giving parents and their children a false sense of security and by driving sex offenders "underground," where they are more difficult to monitor by law enforcement.

We advocate returning the Sex Offender Registry to its original intent, tracking the most dangerous and predatory offenders and absconders. We also need to implement a 5 Tier Risk Level System. This will make a more effective monitoring tool for law enforcement. Finally, we need a National Sex Offender Public Policy Forum to address this issue. Everything else is emotional, knee-jerk advocacy.

sosolutionsnetwork.org


In our reply above, we did not address the statements by Mr. Book where he lumps all sex offenders in one category, something that makes women and children less safe. It is obvious that his research did not include the entire scope of the problem, otherwise he would have not used the term “sex offender” with the phrase “these sexually deviant individuals.”

Nor did we mention these laws also affect the wives, children, parents, and siblings of sex offenders. Are they not worthy of basic Constitutional protections? Where are our so-called “family values” if we believe it is OK to make second-class citizens out of these family members?

Additionally, we did not mention Mr. Book is a professional lobbyist, NOT an expert in Sex Offender Management and Treatment, Law Enforcement, Probation Officer, Defense Attorney or has any know expertise in any field related to the Sex Offender issue. (Click here to view his Lobbying Practice.)

We ask one question, is Cox News (who owns the Palm Beach Post) more interested in advertising dollars and circulation or are they more interested in keeping women and children SAFE?

Apparently, they are more interested in the former. This egregious betrayal of the public trust by our media needs to be addressed if we are to see a solution to the problem.

Therefore, we call on all citizens of the United States to boycott Cox News and their advertisers, until they begin to report this issue in a fair, honest, and accurate manner. If they will not listen to reason, perhaps they will listen to their shareholders.

If you are tired of the media using this issue to advance their bottom line, send your comments to:

Bill Rose, Managing Editor
bill_rose@pbpost.com

Tim Burke, Deputy Managing Editor
tim_burke@pbpost.com

Bill Greer, Assistant Managing Editor/Projects
bill_greer@pbpost.com


###