Megan's Law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Megan's Law is an informal name for laws in the United States requiring law enforcement authorities to make information available to the public regarding registered sex offenders. Individual states decide what information will be made available and how it be disseminated. Commonly included information includes the offender's name, picture, address, incarceration date, and nature of crime. The information is often displayed on free public websites, but can be published in newspapers, distributed in pamphlets, or through various other means.

At the federal level, Megan's Law is known as the Sexual Offender (Jacob Wetterling) Act of 1994 and requires persons convicted of sex crimes against children to notify local law enforcement of any change of address or employment after release from custody (prison, psychiatric facility). The notification requirement may be imposed for a fixed period of time - usually at least ten years - or permanently.

Some states may legislate registration for all sex crimes, even if no minors were involved. It is a felony in most jurisdictions to fail to register or fail to update information.

1 Legal origins
2 Arguments in favor of the law
3 Arguments opposing the law
4 Between the viewpoints
5 References
6 See also
7 External links

[edit] Legal origins

The origins of Megan's Law began with state level attempts to protect communities from sexual offenders. Prior to formal legislation, private citizens groups sometimes distributed information regarding specific offenders in their areas. In 1990, Washington adopted one of the first statewide laws, the Washington State Community Protection Act of 1990.

The laws today are named for Megan Kanka who was seven years old when Jesse Timmendequas, a repeated violent sexual offender who lived across the street from her, kidnapped, raped, and murdered her. Timmendequas was found guilty, and was on New Jersey's death row. In December 2007, New Jersey ended the death penalty. Timmendequas will now serve life without parole.^[1]

Megan's parents, Richard and Maureen Kanka began the Megan Nicole Kanka Foundation with the belief that "Every parent should have the right to know if a dangerous sexual predator moves into their neighborhood."^[2] The Kankas circulated a petition demanding immediate legislative action. The petition garnered over 400,000 signatures, and the law was passed in an unprecedented 89 days.

Megan's home state of New Jersey passed the first so-called "Megan's Law" in 1994.^[3]

Federal legislation followed in 1995. 42 U.S.C. § 13701, entitled Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 and amended May 17, 1996, included provisions requiring community notification. The law was nicknamed "Federal Megan." Authored by Congressman Dick Zimmer, it required every state to develop a procedure for notifying the public when a person convicted of certain crimes is released near their homes. The law has been amended several times since the original bill, and different states have different procedures for making the required disclosures.

[edit] Arguments in favor of the law

This section does not cite any references or sources. (April 2008)
Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed.

The basic intention of Megan's Law, according to its proponents, is to give parents the ability to protect their children by making them aware of the presence of convicted sex offenders in their neighborhood. The individual who murdered Megan Kanka was a convicted sex offender and pedophile of whose background the Kanka family claims not to have been aware. Maureen Kanka maintains that had she known about Timmendequas' prior conviction, she would have warned Megan to stay away from him.

Supporters of Megan's Law say that the law is essential because of the inability of sex offenders to be "cured," citing the extremely high recidivism rates of sex offenders. The law's supporters vigorously oppose using the law for the purpose of harassing or otherwise violating the rights of sex offenders, even if only to prevent the law from being repealed on the grounds that it facilitates such illegal behavior.

In addition, proponents of Megan's Law correctly point out that information about convicted criminals has always been public information; Megan's Law, they say, only makes it easier for parents and other concerned individuals to access this information without having to do laborious research.

The supporters of Megan's Law also maintain that the law's retroactive application to offenders who committed their offenses prior to the law's enactment does not constitute ex post facto law because the intent of the law is not to punish, but to enhance public safety. Whatever incidental harm or inconvenience sex offenders may suffer as a result of the law, its supporters say, is the unavoidable consequence of their own illegal behavior and is outweighed by the community's right to know that a potentially dangerous person is living within their midst.

Megan's Law also provides a way for schools, churches, daycare centers, and volunteer youth organizations (e.g. Boy Scout troops and Little League baseball teams) to screen applicants for positions working with children to assure that they have not been convicted of a sex crime. Similarly, parents seeking babysitters or live-in domestic help can check applicants against the registry database prior to offering them employment.

Proponents of Megan's Law often point out that it is not the law's purpose to promote vigilantism, harassment, or other illegal acts against registered sex offenders. Indeed, every state sex offender registry's web site contains a notice that the information contained must not be used for illegal purposes.

[edit] Arguments opposing the law

Critics of Megan's Law reject the notion that sex offenders have higher recidivism rates than other types of criminals,^[4] and argue that efforts to establish sex offender registries are based on the widespread misconception that child sexual abuse is commonly committed by strangers. In fact, most children are abused by someone they know and trust -- 96 percent of child rape victims knew their attackers.^[5] Critics also argue that these databases unfairly and improperly include the names of those who have engaged in consensual sexual activities (especially, non-marital sexual activities) along with sexual predators, even if that particular individual is not charged or convicted of a sexually based offense.^[6]^[7]^[8]^[9] Some police officers, prosecutors, and crime victims' rights advocates view Megan's Law as an ineffective and unreliable method of preventing sexual predators from repeating their crimes. Some of these critics favor life imprisonment for high-risk sex offenders (especially, child sex offenders) over community notification.^[10]^[11]^[12]^[13]

Legal criticism of Megan's Law notes that it creates the problem of "double jeopardy" and "ex post facto protections". From this perspective Megan's Law is viewed as punitive and the notification requirement is analogous to public shaming. Legal critics maintain that the historical context of forced notification should be examined. If Megan's Law is considered punitive, and thus additional "punishment," then the law would have to be deemed unconstitutional. The opinion of the U.S. court varies greatly in interpreting the constitutionality of Megan's Law.

The registration database is built on information provided by former offenders who are complying with the law, and who are therefore inclined toward accepting responsibility and living law-abiding lives. The registry therefore becomes, in effect, a database of those former sex offenders who presently are law-abiding citizens, and who therefore may be the least likely to re-offend. The real threat, critics maintain, is posed by those offenders who do not bother to register or who provide false information. Another similar criticism is that while parents in the neighborhood are informed, it does not order the offender to leave. It is also unknown if Timmenquedas would have been stopped if he had been made to abide by such a law, in which critics of the law have often stated "Megan's Law would not have saved Megan".^[14]^[15]

Some mental health professionals and social observers believe the laws imposed on released sex offenders may increase, rather than decrease, their likelihood of committing new sex crimes. They assert that the combination of legal restrictions and the shame and harassment resulting from community notification may force offenders to live in isolation. A survey of 133 mental health officials by the University of Memphis revealed that most do not think internet based sex offender directories will be helpful in stopping future attacks. ^[16]

Also of concern to civil rights advocates and law enforcement officials alike have seen instances of vigilantism against registered sex offenders. There have been some highly-publicized cases of vigilantes using state-run sex offender registry web sites to gather information about registered sex offenders in order to plan the murder of those individuals. Two of the more notable cases were the murders of two men in Washington state in August of 2005 and of two men in Maine in April 2006. It is difficult to precisely quantify the frequency of vigilante incidents because neither the Justice Department nor any other governmental agency maintains a database of such incidents. In addition, many lesser incidents (verbal harassment, vandalism, etc.) probably go unreported by the offenders themselves, either because they believe that reporting the harassment is pointless, or because they fear retribution. Critics of the law assert that the government's intentions are meaningless compared to the undeniable fact that information made available pursuant to Megan's Law has repeatedly been used to commit violent crimes, including murder. These critics would assert that the government is guilty of gross negligence by reason of intentional and deliberate indifference to the potentially fatal consequences of the law's requirements.

[edit] Between the viewpoints

In between the camps who are respectively in favor of and opposed to Megan's Law, there is an increasing number^[17]^[18] of people who believe that the negative aspects of the law can be ameliorated through thoughtful reforms, while still preserving the law's core purpose of making information about convicted sex offenders available to the public.

Some of the proposed reforms include the repeal of laws that prohibit consensual sodomy, adultery, oral sex and other consensual sexual activities.^[19]^[20]^[21]^[22]Narrowing the legal definition of indecent exposure to public masturbation and unwelcome display of the genitals is another.^[23]

As an alternative, many states have three strikes laws in addition to Megan's Law. Applying it to child sex offenders and rapists who have been convicted on three or more felony counts related to a sexually based offense or have two or more prior felony convictions would result in a sentence of life in prison for a repeat sex offender. Other alternatives to community notification, which mainly require longer prison terms for child predators include the Jessica Lunsford Act or Jessica's Law which carries a mandatory sentence of 25 years in prison for a child sex offender who would then be subject to lifelong electronic monitoring. In addition, President George W. Bush signed the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act into law in 2006 which carries mandatory minimum prison sentences for child sex offenders. In the states of Louisiana, South Carolina, and Oklahoma, child molestation is a capital offense and is punishable by death by lethal injection.[1]