Taking stock of 20 years of sex offender laws and research: an examination of whether sex offender legislation has helped or hindered our efforts

Abstract

The present study adds to the existing empirical literature on sex offending by examining the effectiveness of a variety of sexual offender laws passed between the two decades of 1990 and 2010. This study used a sample of 1129 sexual offenders released from New Jersey state correctional facilities during these two decades of legislative focus. Specific attention is paid to the four common themes of the legislation, including sexual offender registration and notification, civil commitment, residence restrictions, and risk designation. When each law isanalyzed using its specific purpose and application process, and then compared to a sample of sex offense cases, it becomes apparent that the laws do not apply to a wide percentage of sex offense cases. The researchers conclude that the laws have little preventive capability. The implications of this finding are discussed.

Keywords:

• sex offenders
• legislation
• recidivism

Acknowledgements

This project was supported by various awards from the National Institute of Justice, Office ofJustice Programs, US Department of Justice. The opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice.

Notes

 1. California enacted sex offender registration in 1947 but it did not receive the level of recognition of the subsequent round of laws (Logan 2009).

 2. However, the programs in Texas and New York are a little different in that they are an outpatient program and a hybrid program, respectively (State of Minnesota 2011).

 3. See http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/smart/newsroom.htm

 4. See http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/smart/newsroom.htm.

 5. See Zgoba et al. (2010) and Zgoba and Levenson (2011) for more information regarding sample selection.

 6. The address of residence was checked for all 1129 offenders at the time of the conviction for the index offense. However, a number of offenders did not have an address on record, or only provided a mailing address (i.e., P.O. Box, which cannot be analyzed spatially). As such, these offenders were removed from our sample, and we were left with a sub-sample of 973 offenders.

 7. A shapefile of the New Jersey roadways was provided by the New Jersey Department of Transportation and can be found at http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/gis/data.shtm.

 8. Shapefiles of New Jersey parks, both county- and state-owned, were provided by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), and can be found at http://www.state.nj.us/dep/gis/stateshp.html#COOPEN.

 9. School addresses (including all private, public, and charter schools as well as daycare centers) were provided by the New Jersey Geographic Information Network (NJGIN) and are located at: https://njgin.state.nj.us/NJ_NJGINExplorer/index.jsp. The match rates for schools located in Newark and Paterson were 82 and 71%, respectively.

10. Sex crimes in New Jersey are defined as follows: aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual contact, kidnapping, endangering the welfare of a child, luring or enticing, any crime with a sexual component, or an attempt to commit any of these crimes.

11. Sexual offenders considered to be at most risk for re-offense (i.e., Tier 3) receive the highest level of notification in New Jersey (e.g., local law enforcement agencies must notify schools, summer camps, daycare centers, community organizations, and members of the community via door-to-door notification). Those sexual offenders who are of moderate risk for re-offense (i.e., Tier 2 offenders), are subject to notification of schools, summer camps, daycare centers, and community organizations as well, but not door-to-door notification of the community. Finally, for sexual offenders deemed low risk (i.e., Tier 1), only the local law enforcement agency is notified. Only sexual offenders who have been designated as high- and moderate-risk offenders appear on the state sexual offender internet registry.

12. After the offender has registered with local law enforcement authorities, the case is reviewed by the County Prosecutor's Office in the jurisdiction where the offender resides. With the aid of an actuarial risk assessment [i.e., the Registrant Risk Assessment Scale (RRAS) or the Static 99], the County Prosecutor makes a determination of risk on behalf of the sexual offender: Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3.

13. The State of New Jersey legislature is currently in the process of voting on a statewide 500 ft ban.