Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:23 am
Time: 3:23 am
Results for sex offender notification
4 results foundAuthor: Great Britain. Home Office Title: Reforming the Notification Requirements of Registered Sex Offenders (Part 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003): A Targeted Consultation Summary: This targeted consultation seeks views on four key proposals to reform the notification requirements for registered sex offenders. The aim of the proposals is to ensure that the police are provided with important intelligence, allowing them to manage registered sex offenders more effectively and robustly, and prevent them from exploiting gaps in existing legislation to cause harm both in the UK and overseas. Details: London: Home Office, 2011. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 12, 2011 at:http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/about-us/consultations/notification-sex-offenders/notif-sex-offenders-consult?view=Binary Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/about-us/consultations/notification-sex-offenders/notif-sex-offenders-consult?view=Binary Shelf Number: 122033 Keywords: Sex Offender NotificationSex Offenders (U.K.)Sex Offenses |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) Title: Sex Offender Registration and Notification in the United States: Current Case Law and Issues Summary: The SMART Office has compiled this new resource which summarizes the sex offender registration and notification system within the United States, as well as pertinent case law. Details: Washington, DC: Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART); Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, 2012. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 30, 2012 at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/smart/caselaw/handbook_july2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/smart/caselaw/handbook_july2012.pdf Shelf Number: 126523 Keywords: Sex Offender NotificationSex Offender RegistrationSex Offenders |
Author: Tewksbury, Richard Title: Final Report on Sex Offenders: Recidivism and Collateral Consequences Summary: This report examines the efficacy of sex offender registration and notification (SORN) through its influence on sex offender recidivism and collateral consequences. The first study examines the recidivism rates of two samples of sex offenders, those released prior to SORN and a sample released under SORN in New Jersey. It asks whether or not there are distinct risk profiles among sex offenders with regard to their recidivism trajectories, and if these profiles are similar or different for sex offenders pre- and post-SORN. Additional analyses also include an examination of the influence of demographics, substance abuse, mental health issues, treatment history, sex offense incident characteristics, and criminal history on recidivism trajectories. The second study looks at whether the recidivism trajectories post-prison release for post-SORN sex offenders are similar to or different from the recidivism trajectories post-prison release for post- SORN non-sex offenders who are released from prison via parole. It also specifically focuses on whether or not a series of collateral consequences are experienced similarly or differently among these post-SORN sex and post-SORN non-sex offender parolees. Recidivism data for both studies in this report were obtained through the New Jersey State Police Computerized Criminal History System and the National Crime Information Center’s Interstate Identification Unit. The first study utilizes two samples of sex offenders, and each was provided by the New Jersey Department of Corrections (NJDOC). The pre-SORN group included a random sample of 250 male sex offenders released from prison by the NJDOC during the years 1990-1994, while the post-implementation group utilized the same sampling procedure and size and matched according to relevant demographics (age, race, and criminal history), with the exception that they were released during the years 1995-1999. For the second study, random samples of 247 post-SORN sex offenders and 250 post-SORN non-sex offenders released from prison in New Jersey via parole during 1995-1999 were drawn from the New Jersey Department of Corrections’ databases. The samples in both studies were followed for approximately eight years post-release for assessing recidivism. For both studies, official records of re-arrest for new offenses were employed as the measure of recidivism. Semi-parametric trajectory modeling was also used in both studies to estimate the recidivism trajectories of the pre- and post-SORN releasees, and the recidivism trajectories of the post-SORN sex offender and the non-sex offender releasees. The first study finds that there are limited observable benefits of SORN regarding sex offender recidivism and general recidivism. With an overall low rate of sex offense recidivism, SORN status (e.g. whether an offender is or is not subject to SORN) failed to predict whether sex offenders would reoffend sexually. The results are consistent with previous research which has argued that sex offenders have relatively low rates of recidivism, typically significantly lower than non-sex offenders. SORN status was also not a significant predictor of which sex offenders would reoffend in general, including non-sexual recidivism. Although sex offenders and non-sex offenders share the experience of collateral consequences, results from the second study reveal that several collateral consequences including not living with friends, living in group facilities, and residential relocation appear to differentially impact sex offenders. Policy makers and treatment providers should focus their efforts on those sex offenders identified as belonging to the high-risk trajectory with a particular interest in targeting the risk factors related to a high-risk trajectory. A targeted rather than universal application of SORN seems a viable alternative. Ultimately, the two studies in this report suggest that SORN is not likely to be an effective deterrent for sex offender recidivism and may produce an environment with specific collateral consequences that inhibit reintegration efforts post-prison release for sex offenders. Details: Final Report to the U.S. National Institute of Justice, 2011. 93p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 4, 2013 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238060.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238060.pdf Shelf Number: 127476 Keywords: RecidivismRisk AssessmentSex Offender NotificationSex Offender RegistrationSex Offenders (U.S.) |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) Title: Sex Offender Registration and Notification in the United States: Current Case Law and Issues Summary: Overview of US Sex Offender Registration Sex offender registration and notification systems have been established within the United States in a variety of ways. There are a number of resources which are referred to, loosely, as 'sex offender registries.' For the purposes of clarification, we start this summary with an outline of those systems. Registration is a Local Activity In the United States, sex offender registration is conducted at the local level. The federal government does not have a comprehensive system for directly registering sex offenders. Generally speaking, sex offenders in the United States are required to register with law enforcement in each state, locality, territory, or tribe within which they reside, work, or attend school. Each state has its own distinct sex offender registration and notification system. The District of Columbia and the five principal U.S. territories each have their own systems, as well, and an increasing number of federally-recognized Indian Tribes also have their own sex offender registration and notification systems. Every one of these systems has its own nuances and distinct features. Every jurisdiction (meaning each state, territory, or tribe) makes its own determinations about who will be required to register, what information those offenders must provide, which offenders will be posted on the jurisdiction’s public registry website, and so forth. Even though sex offender registration itself is not directly administered by the federal government, the federal government is involved in sex offender registration and notification in a number of meaningful ways. Details: Washington, DC: SMART, 2016. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 21, 2017 at: https://www.smart.gov/caselaw/handbook_sept2014.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.smart.gov/caselaw/handbook_sept2014.pdf Shelf Number: 141137 Keywords: Sex Offender NotificationSex Offender Registration Sex Offenders |