CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 1
Preventing Sexual Violence: What are the facts underlying the sex‐offense registry?
Eric S. Janus
Mitchell Hamline School of Law
March 2020
DPS CSC Statutory Working Group
Sex offenders: state prisons vs. on registry 2018
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
800000
900000
1000000
2018
Prison
Registry
Sources: Prison Policy Initiative (Prison); Dobbs Wire (registry)
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 2
Source: Hoppe, Punishing Sex: Sex Offenders and the Missing Punitive Turn in Sexuality Studies
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 3
Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84, 103 (2003).
• “The legislature's findings are consistent with grave concerns over the high rate of recidivism among convicted sex offenders and their dangerousness as a class. The risk of recidivism posed by sex offenders is "frightening and high.”
• “estimated to be as high as 80%.”
Recidivism:
(Sexual) reoffense after punishment.
Usually measured by arrest or conviction.
Specified follow‐up period.
Recidivism rate: people, not crimes.
Caveat: Measured recidivism is probably an underestimate because of unreported sexual assault. Unknown by how much.
Distinguish absolute vs. relative measures.
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 4
Sex offender recidivism is well below the myth.
5%
95%
Arrested for new sex crime
Arrested
Notarrested
Child molester sexual recidivism
Source: BJS SO’s released in 1994. 3‐year recidivism.
Sex offender recidivism is well below the myth (9‐year follow‐up)
Source: BJS SO’s released in 2005. 9‐year recidivism.
8%
92%
Arrested for new sex crime
Arrested Not arrested
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 5
Source: BJS SO’s released in 2005. 9‐year recidivism.
Measured recidivism rates have declined in Minnesota.
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 6
Risk among released sex offenders is heterogenous
Risk is below “average” for most sex offenders
8.80%
20%
71%
Risk levels ‐ CA
Well‐above average Above average Average and below
Level 156%Level 2
29%
Level 315%
Risk levels ‐MN 2017
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3Source: Seung C. Lee, R. Karl Hanson, Nyssa Fullmer, Janet Neeley &Kerry Ramos, The Predictive Validity of Static‐99R Over 10 Yearsfor Sexual Offenders in California: 2018 Update, SARATSO 19,http://saratso.org/pdf/Lee_Hanson_Fullmer_Neeley_Ramos_2018_The_Predictive_Validity_of_S_.pdf.
Source: Brian Collins, MN DOC, 2017
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 7
Risk varies by age at release.
Source: BJS SO’s released in 2005. 9‐year recidivism.
Risk declines with time offense‐free in the community
Important policy implications
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 8
Recidivism, at all levels of risk, approaches zero over time.‐ Shorter time for low‐risk; longer for high‐risk.
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 9
Recidivist sex offending is a small part of sexual offending.
Most imprisoned sex offenders do not have a prior conviction for a sex offense.
75%
11%
14%
Imprisoned Sex Offenders
No prior
Violent ‐ no sex
Sex offense
Source: BJS Study of Sex Offenders released in 1994.
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 10
Among all released prisoners, 84% of new sex offenses are committed by people whose index offense was non‐sexual.
16%
84%
Sex offenders Non‐sex offenders
Source: BJS SO’s released in 2005. 9‐year recidivism.
93%
7%
Criminal Sexual Conduct Convictions in Minnesota 2001‐2015
No Prior Conviction
Prior Conviction
Brian Collins (2017) (Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission, 2016)
Most SO Convictions are first‐time sex offenders with no prior SO conviction.
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 11
95%
5% Criminal Sexual Conduct Arrests in New York
No Prior Conviction
Prior Conviction
Most SO Arrests are first‐time sex offenders
Source: Scholars’ Brief, citing Jeffrey C. Sandler et al., Doesa Watched Pot Boil? A Time‐Series Analysis of New York State’sSex Offender Registration and Notification Law. 14 PSYCHOL., PUB.POL’Y & L. 284 (2008) (In N.Y., 95% of sex‐offense arresteesbetween 1986 and 2006 were first‐time sex offenders.).
Most sexual abuse is committed by non‐strangers
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 12
By whom: stranger vs. other.
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
femalevictims of
rape
victims ofrapists
victims ofsexual
assaulter
victims ofchild
molesters
victims ofrape and
s/a
childrenunder 12
victims 18-29
Acquaintance/intimate Stranger
SORN ‐ Effective?
•Mixed results among studies on reduction of recidivism.
• Some deterrent effect detected on sexual violence rate.
• Some negative effect on criminal justice system behavior.
•Clear statistical evidence of perverse increase in recidivism from aggressive laws.
• Increase in recidivism may offset deterrent effect.
CSC Statutory Reform Working GroupOutcomes Subcommittee – March 11, 2020 13
Notification may increase recidivism ‐
• All else equal, publicly revealing the identity and criminal history of a released offender seems to increase the likelihood of his returning to crime. These results are highly statistically significant: it is unlikely that existing notification laws are reducing recidivism among registered offenders, and it is distinctly possible that these laws are making things worse (Prescott, 2012, p. 54).