|
I agree with those people who worry about the publishing of such lists because it can lead to vigilantes. A situation like that occurred recently in my state. A paedophile was released a couple of years ago after serving 15 years for child rape. He went back for 15 months after violating his parole but has now been released. Over the course of 2 weeks, he was run out of 4 different towns by angry citizens, who did things like attacking the car he was transported in, throwing rocks on the houses he was staying in, verbally abusing him and the people he was staying with, and picketing (with their children there as well!) the houses he was staying at. What made matters worse was that the state opposition leader and deputy condoned the vigilante behaviour and came out with such gems as 'well the police minister should try having him live in her street' when she mentioned that stoning people's houses was illegal.
We have a registry but it is not publicly available. He was recognised because he is extremely easy to spot - unfortunately for him, he looks exactly like what you imagine paedophiles to look - long stringy hair, funny walk and speech, tics and jumpiness. The registry was working - the police knew exactly where he was living, where he was working (which is why he went back to jail for the 15 months). He was probably the least able person in the country to engage in paedophilia. He had served his time and he has to live somewhere. Of course no one wants him to live on their street, but if he happens to, you suck it up and be extra careful. There is conflicting data on the recidivism rate of child molesters - during the time of this guy's ordeal I saw it put as low as 15% and as high as 85%. One problem is that what they are basing the statistics on is different in all cases. Whatever the case, though, he has NO chance of starting over and living as a non-criminal citizen if he cannot live anywhere for more than a few days at a time.
The problem also with the registers is that they give people a false sense of security. If people think 'okay, so Mr. Huber at number 14 is on the registry, and the man across the road from Billy's friend Max as well - I'll tell Max's mother to be extra careful... okay, that's it', then they are fooling themselves. A large number at least, perhaps the majority, of child molesters are unknown to police because they have never been caught and so are not on the registry. The very nature of the crime and of the victim lend themselves to secrecy and so often no one ever knows. It is also the case that the majority of offenders are not weird looking strangers, but known to their victims and the child's family - relatives, family friends, or people well-known in the community, like teachers. So if parents are not being vigilant about what their child is doing with everyone, then they are not protecting their child sufficiently. Thinking that they will be safe because they know where the paedophiles live from the registry is simply wrong.
__________________
|