Sex Offenders: How Far Do We Go?
December 20th, 2006 by josh farleyVirtually every state in the country has enacted special measures against sex offenders. Washington is no exception.
A few states — namely Georgia and Iowa — have established the most stringent laws, creating de facto banishment for communities for some offenders.
How? By requiring offenders to live hundreds, sometimes thousands of feet from school bus stops. It makes living in a community almost impossible.
One story by the Washington Post ran as our “editor’s choice” on the Kitsap Sun’s front page a few weeks back. I also wrote a story looking at Washington’s current and new sex offender laws.
Kitsap County Prosecutor Russ Hauge told me that Washington’s laws are some of the toughest in the country, primarily due to “determinant plus” sentencing. That sentencing re-evaluates offenders at the end of their prison terms and examines whether they should be released or civil confined indefinitely.
That’s a fate that may be awaiting Kevin Coe (pictured from his 1981 trial), the so-called “South Hill rapist” from Spokane. Though he’s served a 25-year sentence, the state’s attorney general’s office is attempting to keep Coe confined at McNeil Island, where about 236 other sex predators are being held past their criminal sentences.
Though numerous new sex offender laws have been passed in Washington in the past year (see a list of them here), one that has caused some confusion of late is the creation of “community protection zones.”
Two laws —
House bill 1147 and Senate
bill 6325 — have created the zones, to be applied to public and
private schools and that will prohibit certain sex offenders from
living 880 feet from them.
However, I recently had a complex, but fruitful conversation over e-mail with Kitsap County Sheriff’s detective Steve Duckworth on this topic. After doing his own research, Duckworth said the community protection zone actually applies to only a select few offenders.
And, “Neither law gives law enforcement agencies the authority to restrict where registered sex offenders live,” Duckworth said.
We’ll be continuing this discussion, and it will likely result in a story for the paper in the coming weeks.
For now, what are your feelings about sex offender laws? Have we gone too far, or not far enough?
Loading ...
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
January 12th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
Convicted predators should never see the light of day outside a prison enclosure…meaning we have not gone far enough to protect children and people from these monsters.
I do not care why a predator is a predator…I care that the convicted predator is never turned loose again to prey on another child.
Once convicted of such a crime, in my opinion, such a person has given up all such ‘rights’ as would be accorded other convicted persons of other type crimes.
The convicted predator would have a lifetime prison sentence or would be put down.
January 16th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
Most sex offenders are hiding in government offices.
January 20th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
I’m not sure what study told you where most predators are but doubt government offices constitute the abode of the most predators. Deviants and porno lookers, maybe…
‘Everywhere’ includes… Churches… sport playing fields … courtrooms … the child’s home…predators are everywhere.
Sharon O’Hara
January 22nd, 2007 at 10:57 pm
Pablo, you are a very smart man. A criminal is not a criminal until they have been caught. I think that all government agencies that work with children should require Pshyco Sexual Evaluations be conducted as a prerequisite for these employees. Erring in the safety of children is inexcusable. Employers can do drug testing so why not take a step further when protecting children is the issue.
March 29th, 2007 at 6:15 am
I agree, a psycho-sexual evaluation sounds like a prudent precautionary measure.
March 29th, 2007 at 4:20 pm
I have brought up the need of these evals with the Childrens administration as prerequisite for employment with the Department of Children and Family services. With the escalating instances of sexual abuse involving teachers it couldn’t hurt to require the same for school employee’s.