Court decision likely to expand sex offender roll
By Adam Kealoha Causey
Las Vegas Review-Journal
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Full implementation of a 6-year-old Nevada law may soon cause a dramatic increase in the number of registered sex offenders — raising questions about whether the intended punishment fits the crime.
One state lawmaker suggested dumping part of the “terrible, overly harsh law” as it applies to juvenile offenders.
Congress approved the Adam Walsh Act in 2006 as a guideline for state laws on sex crimes. The statute was intended to toughen punishment for sex offenders, including making their photos, names and addresses available to the general public.
Nevada legislators adopted most provisions of the federal law in 2007, reacting in part to concern the state could lose federal grants for law enforcement.
Now, thanks to a Nevada Supreme Court decision in October, the state will likely expand the sex offender roll from the current 3,000 names by requiring anyone convicted of a felony sex crime or crimes involving children since 1956 to register.
No one knows how many more offenders will be added to the list, but the expansion has raised concerns that people who were convicted long ago but who have never re-offended will be publicly humiliated, lumped in with serial rapists.
Of particular concern are people whose youthful indiscretions will suddenly become a scarlet letter haunting their adult lives.
NO PUBLIC DANGER
For decades Nevada’s approach to dealing with juvenile sex offenders was to treat them more like patients than prisoners, an approach backed by research that shows many children and teens who sexually abuse someone can be treated, and are unlikely to re-offend.
Keeping with that approach, most sex offenders younger than 21 were not required to register as a sex offender. Judges were allowed to determine, after sentencing and monitoring, whether a juvenile offender posed any public danger. A judge could order the offender to register on reaching adulthood.
Clark County Family Court Judge Bill Voy said few juvenile offenders who have appeared before him over the years needed to register.
But the Walsh Act leaves no room for judicial discretion. Sex offenders who are 14 or older at the time of the offense must register under blanket classifications for the crime committed, with no regard for changes in behavior.
Clark County already is seeing effects of the Supreme Court decision. Since October, Voy has ordered four now-adults to register for offenses they committed as juveniles.
Voy said he has to follow the law, even though it doesn’t seem right.
“Now they’re in college; they’re married,” Voy said. “Now they have to register as a sex offender.”
FEW PREDATORY JUVENILES
Human Rights Watch, a Philadelphia-based advocacy group, reported in May that national recidivism rates for juvenile sex offenders range between 4 percent and 10 percent. In some categories it is as low as 1 percent.
By comparison, the recidivism rate for all crimes regardless of age is about 40 percent.
“Many of the children didn’t really understand what they were doing was a sexual offense; they didn’t understand boundaries,” report author and analyst Nicole Pittman said.
The report cites the case of an adult man who was required to register as a sex offender for touching a 12-year-old girl’s chest when he also was 12. The registry in his unidentified state didn’t include a conviction date, and many people assumed his offense was recent, and that he was a child predator.
Registering also creates a stigma that can cause registrants to become a danger to themselves, said Susan Roske, with the juvenile division of the Clark County public defender’s office, which sought to have the juvenile portion of the Walsh Act in Nevada overturned.
“I imagine we will be seeing some suicides,” Roske said.
She is on a committee of lawmakers, advocates and experts that advise the Nevada Legislature about sex offender registration issues. She wants the panel to recommend a bill to eliminate juvenile registration during the 2015 legislative session.
Even the state Supreme Court, in its 4-3 ruling against a lawsuit brought by Roske, said Nevada’s law is constitutional but questioned whether it was best for juveniles.
That got the attention of state Sen. Tick Segerblom, chairman of the committee Roske is on. Segerblom was in the Assembly when both chambers unanimously passed the Walsh Act provisions in 2007. Because state budget cycles last two years, he said, loss of funding forced a too-quick decision.
ADDED COSTS
In addition to overlooking the impact on juvenile offenders, the Legislature didn’t seem to consider the added cost of getting more offenders registered and compliant with the law.
“They’ve never formally tried to figure out the actual cost,” said Maggie McLetchie, a lawyer who worked for the American Civil Liberties Union when it sued the state over the Walsh Act.
McLetchie’s calculations showed implementation would cost millions. By comparison, losing the federal grant would have been less than $200,000.
The responsibility for getting offenders registered falls to multiple agencies, including local law enforcement and the state Division of Parole and Probation.
There’s no national consensus on how state lawmakers should deal with juvenile registration, said Katie Gotch, spokeswoman for the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers. But most agree the Walsh Act goes too far, she said.
“A lot of times laws are based on fear and are a knee-jerk reaction to a high-profile case,” Gotch said.
