Nebraska vigilante case just another in a string of similar incidents

On Saturday, May 16, Mattieo Condoluci, a publicly registered sex offender, was found shot to death inside his Omaha, Nebraska home. James Fairbanks, also of Omaha, surrendered voluntarily, took responsibility for the murder, and is being held in the Douglas County jail. Fairbanks stated that he learned of Condoluci’s status as a convicted sexual offender via the Nebraska sex offender registry.

Fairbank’s wonton murder of Condoluci’s (who is required by law to register as a sex offender) is just the latest in vigilante murders facilitated by public access to a sex offender registry:

• Washington State in 2005 – two registered people murdered;
• Maine in 2006 – two registered people murdered;
• California in 2011 – one registered person murdered;
• Washington State again in 2012 – two registered people murdered; and
• South Carolina in 2013 – two people murdered – one registered person and his wife.

These are just the best documented cases; there have been more, an indeterminable number more. These cases, in addition to all being cold-blooded murders carried out by vigilantes, have one thing in common: They were all facilitated by nothing other than the victim’s existence on a public sexual offender registry.

“There are individuals out there,” said Brenda Jones, NARSOL’s executive director, “who feel they have the right to kill those whose past actions they find despicable. The posting of names and addresses on a public shaming registry is telling these individuals exactly where to go.”

The efficacy of sexual offender registries in reducing recidivism and improving public safety is shown to be nonexistent.

According to Sandy Rozek, NARSOL’s communication director, “There is no justification in preserving a system that does not reduce re-offense rates, does not lower the rate of sexual assault, and that, rather than contributing to public safety, increases the danger to the public in many ways, one of which is painting a target on the foreheads of those with previous sexual crime convictions and giving their would-be killers a roadmap to their doors.”

NARSOL condemns, in the strongest possible terms, vigilante activity, most especially murder, of persons on sexual offense registries and calls on the federal government and states to immediately take the necessary steps to eliminate the online dissemination of these registries. ]]> https://ncrsol.org/2020/05/civil-rights-organization-calls-on-state-federal-govts-to-abolish-registries/feed/ 9 3992 https://ncrsol.org/2020/03/after-he-found-californias-indefinite-detention-of-sex-offenders-wasnt-working-the-state-shut-him-down-and-destroyed-his-research/ https://ncrsol.org/2020/03/after-he-found-californias-indefinite-detention-of-sex-offenders-wasnt-working-the-state-shut-him-down-and-destroyed-his-research/#respond Mon, 30 Mar 2020 23:22:42 +0000 https://ncrsol.org/?p=3847 STEVEN YODER — In late 2006, a public defender went before a Napa County judge to argue for his client’s freedom. Rex McCurdy, a 49-year-old man, had been detained for seven years at Atascadero State Hospital under a 1995 California law authorizing “civil commitment” of people who have been convicted of sex offenses, a practice that keeps them confined long after they have completed their sentences.

In 1983, McCurdy had pleaded guilty to a rape, for which he served two years in state prison. In 1990, he was convicted of a burglary and served another six years. In 1998, McCurdy says he was brought in on a parole violation for living too close to a school, contrary to his conditions of release. Prosecutors used that violation and the two prior convictions to get McCurdy classified as a “sexually violent predator” (SVP), he says. That designation let them civilly commit him to Atascadero, much the way people with mental health issues can be locked up when they are deemed a threat to themselves or others.

Seven years after McCurdy was committed, his lawyer, Jim McEntee, was trying to persuade a judge that his client was a low risk to reoffend. If he failed, McCurdy would be confined at the hospital indefinitely. Fortunately, the lawyer had heard of evidence that might tip the scales: a study done at Atascadero itself that could help his client.

Read the entire story by clicking here

The lawsuit was filed by the Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws (ACSOL), which also filed similar lawsuits this week in Riverside and Sacramento counties.

It asks for a judge to issue an order halting the practice of having registered sex offenders appear in person at police headquarters, and instead adopt video conferencing or other means such as telephone calls. The Los Angeles Police Department and other California police departments have implemented temporary suspensions of in-person registry requirements to lessen the impact of the Covid-19 virus from spreading to and from officers and registrants, families, and others within the home.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys say the registrants represented in the suit “have high-risk COVID-19 factors such as age and/or chronic diseases (diabetes, asthma, and hypertension). These are the groups identified by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) at a high risk of potentially acquiring the Covid virus.

The plaintiffs allege that the police department has directed local registrants to appear in person, subjecting them to a “Catch-22,” in that “they must either subject themselves to COVID-19 infection (in violation of a state order), or violate law by failing to appear in person, thereby inviting arrest and custody in jail or prison (where they risk of COVID-19 infection is much greater.”

The lawsuit cites the California Governor’s stay-at-home order, as well as local emergency declarations made by the San Diego Mayor and other county officials, who also urged residents to stay home unless they need to go out for essential purposes. The registry is being used as punishment weapon in a time of crisis rather than a community tool for safety.

NCRSOL has reached out to local media, state and local leaders to address similar concerns about North Carolina registry requirements during the Covid-19 outbreak. NCRSOL has received no response or guidance from leaders.

Those with registry requirements who have recently been released from incarceration will still be processed and registered, according to media reporting.

Current registrants in Texas that have been previously processed and actively on the sex offender registry are instructed to call and make an appointment to come back at a later date.

Other police agencies throughout the country are suspending sex offender registrations and in-person requirements as a precaution due to the COVID virus pandemic. Police agencies in South Carolina, Nevada, Arkansas, and Florida have taken steps to not only protect officers but the registry community. Some of these states are using Skype, Zoom, and other mobile based video conferencing to check on the registry population as an alternative.

All of the police departments have taken the advice and guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to reduce low priority contact with the general public.

NCRSOL has reached out on multiple occasions to the various state and local leaders as well as medial outlets to suspend mandatory sex offender in-person registration temporarily. We have not had replies.

Today, a sex offender advocacy group in California has filed a civil lawsuit to stop police from requiring sex offender in-person or home checks because of the pandemic. Perhaps North Carolinians affected by the sex offender registry should consider filing a lawsuit to temporarily suspend in-person sex offender requirements?

In October 2014, the City of Milwaukee began prohibiting violent and repeat sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of any school, day care center or park. That left just 55 addresses where offenders can legally move within the 100-square-mile city. And their living options soon will become more limited across Wisconsin. Republican Gov. Scott Walker signed a bill in February that prohibits violent sex offenders from living within 1,500 feet of any school, day care, youth center, church or public park in the state.

Cities and states continue to enact laws that restrict where convicted sex offenders can live, applying the rules to violent offenders such as pedophiles and rapists, and, in some cases, those convicted of nonviolent sex crimes, such as indecent exposure. They are doing so despite studies that show the laws can make more offenders homeless, or make it more likely they will falsely report or not disclose where they are living. And though the laws are meant to protect children from being victimized by repeat offenders, they do not reduce the likelihood that sex offenders will be convicted again for sexual offenses, according to multiple studies, including one from the U.S. Department of Justice.

In all, 27 states have blanket rules restricting how close sex offenders can live to schools and other places where groups of children may gather, according to research by the Council of State Governments. Hundreds of cities also have restrictions, according to the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers (ATSA). And many laws are becoming more restrictive — along with Wisconsin, they expanded last year in Arkansas, Montana, Oklahoma and Rhode Island.

The restrictions can make offenders’ lives less stable by severely limiting their housing options, and can push them away from family, jobs and social support — all of which make it more likely they will abuse again, according to researchers who have studied the laws, such as Kelly Socia, assistant professor of criminal justice at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell.

“If [the laws] don’t work, and they make life more difficult for sex offenders, you’re only shooting yourself in the foot,” Socia said.  (Please read full article in Stateline, Pew Charitable Trusts)