Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Page 6 of 10 <br />http://themediareport.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Residential-Proximity-to-Schools-and-Daycare-study- <br />2010.pdf <br />Abstract: “Residential restrictions for sex offenders have become increasingly popular, despite <br />the lack of empirical data suggesting that offenders’ proximity to schools or daycares contributes <br />to recidivism. Using a matched sample of recidivists and non-recidivists from Florida (n = 330) for <br />the period from 2004 through 2006, the authors investigated whether sex offenders who lived <br />closer to schools or daycares were more likely to reoffend sexually against children than those who <br />lived farther away. No significant differences were found between the distances that recidivists <br />and non-recidivists lived from schools and daycares. There was no significant relationship between <br />reoffending and proximity to schools or daycares. The results indicate that proximity to schools <br />and daycares, with other risk factors being comparable, does not appear to contribute to sexual <br />recidivism. These data do not support the widespread enactment of residential restrictions for <br />sexual offenders.” <br />10) Sex Offender Housing Restrictions, (2013) The Kansas Department of Corrections. Retrieved 2/12/2016. <br />http://www.doc.ks.gov/publications/CFS/sex-offender-housing-restrictions. <br />A. “Housing restrictions appear to be based largely on three myths that are repeatedly propagated <br />by the media: 1) all sex offenders reoffend; 2) treatment does not work; and 3) the concept of <br />“stranger danger.” Research does not support these myths, but there is research to suggest that <br />such policies may ultimately be counterproductive. Sex offender residence restrictions. A Report <br />to the Florida Legislature, October 2005, Jill S. Levinson, Ph.D. <br />B. Research shows that there is no correlation between residency restrictions and reducing sex <br />offenses against children or improving the safety of children. Iowa County Attorneys Association <br />C. The resulting damage to the reliability of the sex offender registry does not serve the interests of <br />public safety. Iowa County Attorneys Association <br />D. There is no demonstrated protective effect of the residency requirement that justifies the huge <br />draining of scarce law enforcement resources in the effort to enforce the restriction. Iowa County <br />Attorneys Association <br />E. Many prosecutors have observed that the numerous negative consequences of the lifetime <br />residency restriction has caused a reduction in the number of confessions made by offenders in <br />cases where defendants usually confess after disclosure of the offense by the child. In addition, <br />there are more refusals by defendants charged with sex offenses to enter plea agreements. Plea <br />agreements are necessary in many cases involving child victims in order to protect the children <br />from trauma of the trial process. Iowa County Attorneys Association <br />F. Recommendation 1: Shared Living Arrangements appear to be a frequently successful mode of <br />containment and treatment for higher risk sex offenders and should be considered a viable living <br />situation for higher risk sex offenders in the community…. Recommendation 2: Placing restrictions <br />on the location of correctionally supervised sex offender residences may not deter the sex offender <br />from re-offending and should not be considered as a method to control sexual offending <br />recidivism. Report on Safety Issues Raised by Living Arrangements for and Location of Sex <br />Offenders in the Community; Colorado Department of Public Safety, Division of Criminal justice, <br />Sex Offender Management Board <br />G. ....the number of sex offenders who are unaccounted for has doubled since the law went into <br />effect. Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault