Nobody, wants a sex offender living across the street from their kids or themselves, so when Jessica’s Law was passed in 2006, many citizens were relieved. The law was named after a Florida girl, 9 year old Jessica Lunsford, who was kidnapped, raped, and buried alive near her home in 2005. In Florida, the law states that registered sex offenders cannot live within 1,000 feet of a school, park, or anywhere that children gather. In California, it’s 2,000 feet. But in 22 other states that distance can range from 500-2,000 feet. And some states only impose the ordinance around schools.
So, all in all, it sounds like a win-win situation for everyone, right? Wrong! In California, almost all of San Francisco’s housing is within 2,000 feet of a school or park, so where are these sex offenders to go? Well, in many states, the answer is nowhere. Not “nowhere” literally, but more and more sex offenders are reporting that they are homeless in order to avoid being tracked by the state. In California and Florida especially, the problem is huge. Many of these convicted criminals simply cannot find suitable housing and are avoiding re-arrest by reporting that they are homeless. ”They drop off the registry because they don’t want to admit living in a prohibited zone,” said Corwin Ritchie, executive director of the association of Iowa prosecutors.
So the problem which exists now is that these ”homeless” sex offenders are very difficult to track. Many are living under bridges and on the streets. Some parole officers say that offenders are registering as homeless so that they may sneak back and do it again (commit a criminal sexual offense ), without being tracked. Many of these transient offenders currently do not wear the GPS tracking device required by Jessica’s Law, so it is easy for them to get away with it. How should states deal with this issue? While the Gorilla believes that this law has accomplished what it has set out to do, some states are showing a fairly large increase in its numbers of homeless sex offenders since only August of this year. Are we really solving the problem, or just encouraging sex offenders to get more creative and clever when it comes to “getting away” with their crimes?
November 1st, 2007 at 1:07 pm
That is the question-yes, are we making the problem worse? I did my research on this topic and believe it or not, legislators actually hate this law because they feared this would happen. The idea is to get these criminals to register with the state like they are required to do by law, but it makes them run and hide in MANY cases. Actually this topic was just highlighted on this week’s episode of Boston Legal! Did anyone watch it? Very interesting, and it really made you think!
November 1st, 2007 at 4:22 pm
A friend of mine had a registered sex offender move into the neighborhood. When the locals found out they managed to get the guy to move elsewhere. Perhaps they could start a sex offenders city and not let anyone under 18 move in - a bit like adult communities for the retired who don’t let anyone under 50 in.
November 1st, 2007 at 5:02 pm
WHY is this a PROBLEM? This should be an OPPORTUNITY to LOCK UP a HELL of a lot of sex offenders who SHOULD NOT BE OUT OF JAIL IN THE FIRST PLACE!
First, outlaw homelessness for sex offenders, like they do in Georgia.
Next, if said offender is living within 2000 feet, LOCK ‘IM UP!
Finally, if they have NO address to move to, LEAVE THEM IN JAIL!
What’s the problem???
November 5th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
Unfortunately, these convicted sex offfenders are at great physical risk when in jail from the other inmates, they are hurt or killed, and the prison authorities end up with a MAJOR law suit. These suits do not occur if they are hurt or killed outside prison. And the jails are major overcrowded with even more dangerous people who can not be released. Some of these people are categorized as “sex offenders” for urinating in public, with a indecent exposure charge and required registration. Certainly a difficult problem with no easy solutions.