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/police-suspend-sex-offender-check-ins-amid-pandemic-in-other-states/ https://ncrsol.org/2020/03/police-suspend-sex-offender-check-ins-amid-pandemic-in-other-states/#comments Tue, 24 Mar 2020 17:19:24 +0000 https://ncrsol.org/?p=3725 The Dallas Police Department in the state of Texas is making changes to the way it checks in with sex offenders because of the COVID-19 pandemic. It appears that other police agencies are taking notice of how to protect officers and the general public by suspending the amount of foot traffic and implement social distancing standards.

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?

Jacob’s mother, Patty, lobbied Congress to pass the Jacob Wetterling Act in 1994, the same year the S.C. Legislature established a state registry. Since then, lawmakers have added layer upon layer of ever more burdensome requirements.

These laws are almost always trumpeted as “protecting children” and regularly cite the claim that “sex offenders often pose a high risk of re-offending” (S.C. Code of Laws, 23-3-400). However, a steadily growing body of evidence demonstrates that this premise is simply not true and that our sex-offender laws in fact do very little to protect children.

South Carolina now has more than 14,000 citizens on the registry; probably fewer than a thousand of those pose any real risk to the public. But you can’t identify them because the registry is cluttered with thousands of people whose crimes were committed decades ago, teens who had sex with other teens and countless minor offenses. Tier assignments confuse the issue further, giving the illusion of identifying the riskier registrants although they are unrelated to the risk of re-offense.

The fact is that the overwhelming majority of child sexual assaults are not committed by previously convicted sex offenders: 94 percent, according to a 2003 Department of Justice study. Numerous other studies have produced similar results. Turning that number around, it means that for all the expense and effort put into registries, they are, at best, relevant to only about 6 percent of child molesting cases. So we are focusing vast attention and resources on a very small segment of the crimes and doing very little to prevent the other 94 percent.

The Wetterling case provides a good illustration. Even though Jacob’s death provided the impetus to begin this crusade, the sad irony is that if all of today’s laws had been in existence in 1989, they would have done nothing whatsoever to protect Jacob Wetterling. Jacob’s killer had no previous sex crime convictions. He did not choose a victim from his neighborhood; Jacob was kidnapped some 30 miles from the perpetrator’s home.

The Justice Department study also demonstrated that re-offense rates of sex offenders are actually far below other offense groups: Only 3.5 percent of child molesters were convicted of another sex crime during the three-year study period.

South Carolina mandates lifetime registration, but a long-term study released last year by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation revealed that after former offenders remain offense-free for 15 years, the statistical probability of them committing a new sex crime was indistinguishable from the general population. The bottom line is that the state’s registry and related policies are consuming millions of dollars and imposing onerous restrictions on thousands of citizens, but are perilously close to useless.

It is time to change course. Interestingly, Patty Wetterling, who championed the original registry law, now advocates for scaling back registries, recognizing that what they have become has diminished their usefulness and caused untold collateral damage.

As our Legislature reconvenes in January, lawmakers need to take a long, hard look at the sex-offender registry and related laws. Consider what is actually supported by research and contemporary knowledge versus what has been passed as a result of 1980s-era myths and emotional knee-jerk reactions to isolated horrific crimes.

Scaling back the registry would no doubt raise the hackles of some who love to play the label-and-hate game, but doing so would be the most just and economically expedient thing to do. And the citizens of the state would be much better served by a smaller (and cheaper) registry that accurately identifies those who might pose a real risk.

Mr. Thurber is S.C. state advocate for Reform Sex Offender Laws; contact him at dthurber@scrsol.org.

Source: The State, Columbia, SC