Advertisement

Archive for Sunday, September 18, 2011

Sex offender registry compliance varies across Kansas counties

September 18, 2011

Advertisement

State registry

• Registered sex offenders in Kansas: 4,572

• Sex offenders in compliance with registry: 92 percent

• Registered sex offenders in Douglas County: 81; 79 in compliance

Of the 688 sex offenders who have moved out of Kansas since 2006 (and stayed out of state):

• 77 have been deported.

• 113 are in prison in another state.

• 337 are registered in the state that the Kansas registry indicates they moved to.

• 161 are not registered in the state listed on the Kansas registry.

  • The registry is updated daily, so the numbers may vary depending on the day. The above numbers were gathered on Sept. 6.
Related document

Sex offender registry compliance by county ( .PDF )

Michelle McMillin is on a first-name basis with most of the registered sex offenders in Saline County. McMillin, registry specialist with the Saline County Sheriff’s Office, is responsible for keeping an eye on the county’s 140 sex offenders legally required to register and check in four times per year.

“It’s kind of a one-on-one relationship,” said McMillin, who makes pre-emptive phone calls and sends deputies out to remind offenders that they need to check in with the office. Offenders late on their registration, which is a felony offense, might even get a visit from a deputy at their place of employment. McMillin said the office takes a proactive approach with the registry, as opposed to arresting an offender after a violation.

“It just seems like time better spent,” she said.

Looking at the numbers, McMillin’s efforts to keep sex offenders compliant have paid off.

Statewide, about 92 percent of sex offenders comply with registration requirements, but Saline County’s rate is above 99 percent, as only one of its 140 offenders is not compliant.

A Journal-World investigation found that compliance rates vary across the state, highlighting a disparity in how 105 Kansas counties enforce the law. For instance, in Ford County, the compliance rate for their 47 registered sex offenders is 74 percent.

In Greenwood County, only 11 of the county’s 16 offenders are in compliance. Douglas County, on the other hand, boasts a better-than-average compliance rate, with only two noncompliant offenders out of 81 offenders in the county.

How closely counties follow offenders is up to each sheriff’s office, said Nicole Dekat, public service administrator with the Kansas Bureau of Investigation. The KBI only maintains the registry and updates information that counties provide.

Over in Wyandotte County, which has an 81 percent compliance rate for its 432 sex offenders, it’s a lack of resources that keeps the county’s rate lower than the rest of the state, said Lt. Kelli Bailiff, spokesperson for the sheriff’s office.

With hundreds of offenders, it’s more difficult to track everyone down, and the county relies on certified letters as the first step if someone fails to register on time.

The county has just one employee dedicated to only monitoring sex offender registry compliance, so the county has to be creative with resources, Bailiff said.

The sex offender registry staff person is always on call and will head out to register an offender if they’re pulled over for a traffic stop.

“His phone rings all night long,” Bailiff said.

Comments

akt2 2 years, 7 months ago

I've seen them post pictures, descriptions and last known residences on Kansas City news stations. They are most always caught and the viewers are updated. Getting their pictures out to the public is the easiest way to catch them. Too many eyes to hide from.

0

Fred Whitehead Jr. 2 years, 7 months ago

"The registry was created through successful lobbying from people like Adam Walsh who wanted to inform the public of dangerous "violent predators." That is, people who are driven to repeatedly commit these acts due to a chemical brain imbalance or some other driving factor that makes them pre-disposed to do these things"

This being the case, why then would a young man be placed on this lifetime registry for having sex with his now wife when they were underage? How does this protect anyone from "dangerous predators??

I know I keep harping on this incident from a few years ago, but it seems that whoever stewed up these laws to get more votes at the next election, forgot to consider the collateral damage that such "no tolerance" laws would create and the danger that would be created for innocent persons snared in this iron-clad set of laws and outrageous contentions about the nature of those who may be sex offenders or who may be falsely accused. I know that happens, I have seen it happen.

I do not have problems with makeing information about the whereabouts of such persons public information, but the process of putting them there with no judicial or sane proceedures and appeals is injust and frankly, very expensive to police. These laws need some common sense other than idiots proclaiming that "offenders cannot be rehibilitated" Offenders that have been framed have no such options available to them.

0

rbwaa 2 years, 7 months ago

Also from your link: "When providing clarifications about the lower than generally acknowledged rates of recidivism, we must be careful not to oversimplify. Recidivism research is as difficult as it is important. For instance, although average rates tell us what percentage reoffends one or more times, we also need to be aware that a subset re-offends at a frighteningly high rate. In addition, there are reasons to think that published findings underestimate the true rates. Most research necessarily omits those offenders who were not detected and arrested or whose victims did not report the crime. Further, many sex offenders plea-bargain down to a nonsexual offense."

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=misunderstood-crimes

0

signoflife 2 years, 7 months ago

I didn't say any of it was acceptable.

...This also means 65% don't commit any other crimes. You also need to compare with articles about rates for other crimes, such as burglary, etc.

0

kawrivercrow 2 years, 7 months ago

From your link:

"Nevertheless, perpetrators of different types of sex crimes exhibit varying rates of repeat offending. The 15-year recidivism rate is 13 percent for incest perpetrators, 24 percent for rapists, and 35 percent for child molesters of boy victims."

You've got some amazingly low standards if you think this is acceptable.

0

signoflife 2 years, 7 months ago

I think the real issue is people need to be educated about what constitutes an offense and the reasons the registry was put into place in the first place.

The registry was created through successful lobbying from people like Adam Walsh who wanted to inform the public of dangerous "violent predators." That is, people who are driven to repeatedly commit these acts due to a chemical brain imbalance or some other driving factor that makes them pre-disposed to do these things.

In Kansas, people who are deemed as "violent predator" are kept civilly committed. In other words, they are not out on the street posing danger to society.

The range of offenses can be quite large that will land you on the Kansas registry. There are a few that have raped, etc,... but there are also others that may have gone streaking in public, people convicted of "sexting" with a minor online, etc. There does not necessarily have to be contact between victim and offender. What is listed on the registry is what charge they were convicted of, not necessarily what actually happened. In many cases a plea deal is reached where the offender will take a certain charge to reduce the punishment.

The registry adds confusion, because now the public doesn't really know who is a lesser offender and who is truly dangerous.

The real issue is, does society really need to keep track of people even after their time is served? If an offender receives 5 years as a sentence, and they complete it successfully, do we need to really track them for 20 years? Instead that seems like a 20 year sentence, not 5.

...one last item to note..... The recidivism rate among sex offenders is the lowest of all offenses. Hence comments such as "...cannot be rehabilitated." Are just false. You need to check your sources.... http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=misunderstood-crimes

0

kawrivercrow 2 years, 7 months ago

Just so you all know, the deported ones are back already.

0

Fred Whitehead Jr. 2 years, 7 months ago

Well, Slow, and what would you do with the information your so loudly request?? Do you think that these persons should be hounded, attacked, have their property vandalized, or worse? What use would it be to you to have names and addresses? Do you like to throw eggs at persons who you know to be members of this list?

The information is available on many web sies, both state and national. Perhaps you need to think a bit about what your motives might be and also do some research before you post stupid blather on this blog.

0

Slowponder 2 years, 7 months ago

Is anyone bothered that LJW lists everyone who files bankruptcy or files for divorce because the paper believes the publication of names is part of its informing function about matters of pubic interest, but when there is a LJW article on sex offenders, and two in the county are not in compliance, not one mention of a name or last known address is given. Publish the names and the location will be instantly provided here. Sheesh! Talk about falling down on your informing function . . . .

0

Cant_have_it_both_ways 2 years, 7 months ago

In the 60's the town would have taken care of the problem and the sheriff would have looked the other way.

0

ralphralph 2 years, 7 months ago

"deported" and "in prison in another state" = tie for best possible outcome.

0

autie 2 years, 7 months ago

I think that most sex offfenders, especially those that violate children, should have their testicles removed with a pair of large pruning shears...for the males anyway. How is that for a constitutional right violation Rudy? Your argument is not an argument at all. You only search for BS excuses guised as some pseudo rhetoric. Following your false logic, there would be no KASPER search available online, DUI offenders would never lose their license and it not be a crime to sell dope within a thousand feet of a school. And we could get rid of all the probation and parole officers.

0

rbwaa 2 years, 7 months ago

Sexual assault carries with it the loss of trust and feeling safe to mention just two of the rights we have as human beings. In the case of a child it also includes the loss of childhood. These are lifelong issues the victim has to cope with. What pain does the offender feel for having taken away these rights? Many offenders feel that their offense didn't really cause harm - it just got blown out of proportion, it wasn't really harmful. The minor pain of having to register does not compare to the pain the victim feels.

Unfortunately, however, you are right the registry does not increase the right of the victim or anyone else to feel safe which is the real crime.

And, the "due process of law" was imparted when the offender was found guilty.

0

been_there 2 years, 7 months ago

"What right does a victim lose? " They had their right to not be violated taken away when the offender decided it was their right to do so.

0

Rudy101 2 years, 7 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

0

been_there 2 years, 7 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

0

Rudy101 2 years, 7 months ago

Do you really believe you can create a police State purely out of a legislative vote???

The registry was passed ex-post facto, the State is allowed to add any type of restrictions upon anyone on a registry, can add anyone on a registry they want, at any time, no registry law has to show it protects anyone, and there is no forum to show how any registry law, as applied to individuals, will actually decrease public safety.

In other words, there is no regulatory effect of the registry as required.

But you don't care. They have lost their rights, and you don't care how those rights were taken.

You are supposed to live in a country that follows some semblance of rule of law, by following basic processes when looking to restrict citizens. Legislative fiat, outside of a court of law is not a process. It is ILLEGAL.

In every single debate, it is always with the mantra of, "we have no sympathy for them" or some variation on that.

The funny thing about it is you think you can pass laws that have to be followed when there is no concern whether there is actual public safety AND you don't care about any effect it has on a registrant, and then the State will have the temerity to call it, "regulatory."

Your registry has no credibility. I know you think you do, with all that ignorance and hate of yours. However, it is mainly that reason of ignorance and hate that made you pass the illegal laws and blinds you to the obvious truth that the registry, as applied, is against, not only the U.S. Constitution, but international law also.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.