Posting #186 – HB1004 Legislation from Delegate Clifford Athey – Front Royal

Update:

• As of Friday February 12 HB1004 had not been scheduled on a sub-committee docket to be discussed.
• Tuesday February 16 is Cross-Over Day. This means if a House bill hasn't made it all the way through to the House Floor to be voted to then  start the process in the other chamber after Cross-Over Day then the bill is dead.
• HB1004 has died because no action was taken by the 2010 General Assembly.

Back in 2007 the same bill (http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?071+sum+HB2404) not only passed through the House sub-committee and full committee but was approved with a vote of 98 to 0 on the House floor. It was only killed when it was reviewed by the Senate sub-committee.
All of your e-mail’s, phone calls and letters in opposition of HB1004 stopped it from ever proceeding. Great job everybody!

By:  RSOL of Virginia
Date:  01/15/2010

Virginia Supporters,

HB1004 is a VERY dangerous Bill. Please write or call Delegate Athey, your district’s Delegate and Senator and ask them NOT to support this bill!

Delegate Clifford Athey
(804) 698-1018 GA office in Richmond
(540) 635-2123 Front Royal office
DelCAthey@house.virginia.gov

RSOL of Virginia

Dear Virginia Delegates and Senators,

HB1004 is a VERY dangerous Bill.

HB 1004 Sex offenses prohibiting residing in proximity to children; penalty.
01/13/10 Sponsor- Clay Athey R-Front Royal   http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?ses=101&typ=bil&val=hb1004

• This bill changes the current statute from only 4 crimes involving the Highest risk “Sex Offenders” to include ANYONE whose crime was against a minor, violent or non-violent, felony or misdemeanor to be included in the 500 ft. residency restriction no matter how long ago it was.
• This bill also ADDS bus stops, community centers, recreation centers, public parks/playgrounds, and public swimming pools where the current statute only includes schools and daycare facilities. Which already makes attending church or temple impossible.
• This bill; if passed, would be retroactive which means thousands of RSO's who currently live less than 500 ft. from a day care, school, bus stop, community center, recreation center,  public park/playground, and public pool WILL BE FORCED TO MOVE, no matter how long they've lived there!

Although we know that no current map is in existence, we suggest one should be created for the entire state. A dot representing EVERY school, day care facility, bus stop, community center, recreation center, public park and playground, and public swimming pool. Then a 500 ft. Circle around EACH one of them, we believe that the circles could easily cover the majority of the state.

HB1004 will cause widespread homelessness which would result in families being torn apart, unemployment and people who no longer bother to register. We have already found some examples of persons who became unemployed, failing to register this fact out of fear of the potential repercussions. Once they did find permanent residence they reported that they had failed to notify the State Police of this and were promptly incarcerated.

Obviously, if passed this Bill will result in unimaginable lawsuits against the Commonwealth.
This would include anyone who agreed to a plea agreement not knowing that this would eventually include the dissolution of their family, forcing their hand to sell their home in a down economy and the sentencing to remain a vagrant for life. Simply put this is a ‘Breach of Contract’ on the part of Virginia. Who would accept a plea agreement if this were included upon it. Obviously ‘Cruel and Unusual Punishment’ would come into play in addition to any ‘Ex Post Facto’ laws. Previously with the smaller changes these have been upheld by the Virginia Supreme Court, but be no mistake, this Bill is a game changer.

The more frightening of the scenarios is that HB1004, if passed would undue any possible benefit that the Registry has thus offered the citizens of Virginia. Those listed would become untraceable. Those listed would become desperate. Those listed would by necessity continually relocate within the State. Do not take our word for this, please consult experts and even the Virginia State Police, the biggest concern for recidivism is not among those with a stable job and a stable home, but with those who have nothing. This Bill will create the worst possible scenario and place all Virginians at greater risk of crime. Those listed could and would be hiding within the shadows and in the woods.

Delegate Athey submitted a similar bill in 2007 that also attempted to increase the distance from 500 to 1000 ft. But thankfully the Senate Committee had the insight to see it as it is. It was a detrimental and dangerous Bill, they had the wisdom to killed it.

We urge you to contact Delegate Athey and explain to him just what a bad idea this really is, this bill should be withdrawn immediately. Do not let it even enter Sub-committee as it is a waste of your time and should be considered an embarrassment to anyone hoping to prevent crime.

Residential Proximity to Schools and Daycare Centers:
Influence on sex offense recidivism, An empirical analysis by Jill Levenson, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Human Services at Lynn University, December 23, 2008:
Residential proximityto schools and daycare centers.PDF
Sex Offender Residence Restrictions: Unintended Consequences and Community Reentry, by Jill S. Levenson2007  Sex Offender Residence Restrictions: Unintended Consequences and Community Reentry.PDF
When Evidence Is Ignored: Residential Restrictions For Sex Offenders
By Richard Tewksbury and Jill Levenson  http://www.aca.org/publications/pdf/Tewksbury.pdf
More books, studies and reports can be found on our web-site, http://www.rsolvirginia.org/reports.html

Thank you.
RSOL of Virginia

Bills Regulating Sex Offenders, Death Penalty Discussed, February 16, 2010:
http://www.nvdaily.com/news/2010/02/bills-regulating-sex-offenders-death-penalty-discussed.php
(This article is so biased and filled with mis-information based totally on hysteria not facts that the RSOL of Virginia wrote to the author and sent a letter to the editor.
We then attempted to leave comments but it said the comments had to be approved by the blog administrator, as expected our comments were never posted.
We imagine the author and possibly the four sheriffs’ are friends, family or donors of Delegate Athey's. This article could be considered a political advertisement for Delegate Athey veiled as news. )

Tougher Sex-Offender Bills Die in Committee, February 18, 2010:http://www.henricocitizen.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=141&twindow=Default&mad=No&sdetail=1894
&wpage=&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=
&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=1910&hn=henricocitizen&he=.com

Bill Aims to Limit Where Sex Offenders Can Live, February 15, 2010:
http://hamptonroads.com/2010/02/bill-aims-limit-where-sex-offenders-can-live

Bill Further Restricts Sex Offenders, February 14, 2010:
http://www.roanoke.com/politics/wb/236500

Bill: More Limits for Sex Offenders, January 21, 2010:
http://www.winchesterstar.com/pages/view/offenders.html

Jumping Ugly in Virginia, January 18, 2010:
http://defendingsexcrimes.blogspot.com/2010/01/jumping-ugly-in-virginia.html

1st Response to Posting #186
From:  Mary Ann
Date:  01/15/2010

Dear Elected Officials of the Commonwealth of Virginia,

I am writing you in regards to HB 1004, sponsored yet again by Delegate Athey.  This bill needs to be stopped!  Delegate Athey and his office have not taken the time to research the facts and the far reaching ramifications of this bill.  It is my hope that as elected Representatives of the Commonwealth of Virginia you will put great thought into the ramifications of even considering this bill.  It is my hope that as informed elected officials you will completely dismiss this punitive and unreasonable bill!  The Virginia Chapter of the Reform Sex Offender Laws Organization took the time and the expense to deliver to each of you Dr. Richard Wright “Sex Offender Law; Failed Policies, New Directions” book.

It is my hope that each of you will refer to this book by before considering passing HB 1004.  In particular pay close attention to Chapters 3 and 9.  Ramifications to passing this bill will result in widespread homelessness, families being torn apart, unemployment and people not-registering.  Look around your community before considering this bill. Where is there not a day care, school, bus stop, community center or school?  Does Virginia want to follow the example of Florida and have entire communities of Sex Offenders living under the Tully Bridge?  Read this article written in Newsweek regarding a Florida Lobbyist who is now having second thoughts to residency restrictions: http://www.newsweek.com/id/208518. 

As elected officials your constituents rely on you to make educated and informed decisions when voting for bills.  We expect our elected officials to research every pro and con for every bill placed before them before they vote.  We expect our elected officials to vote on the facts  and not knee-jerk, panic reactions.   We expect our elected officials to be forth right and fair to all of the residents of Virginia.  It  is my sincere hope you or your staff will take the time to gather further information by visiting this site:  http://www.rsolvirginia.org/reports.html

A well informed, unbiased Representative is what the citizens of Virginia voted for.  It is my hope you meet these requirements.

Sincerely,
Mary Ann

 

2nd Response to Posting #186
 From:  Charles
 Date:  01/15/2010

Dear Delegate Athey,

I sent an email yesterday and also called your Richmond office this morning.

I would like to sincerely ask you to rethink and withdraw HB1004 to the Assembly.  Although I am not a constituent of your district, I am a citizen of this Commonwealth, and this bill will do extreme damage to 16,600 citizens, their spouses, their children, their parents and their siblings both now and for generations to come.  This bill would cause homelessness, joblessness, and Virginia would actually lose track of RSO's that are currently registering today. By necessity, the homeless would be forced to rove from place to place as a large group in order to maintain some form of safety from would-be vigilante groups targeting these individuals.

The current laws are working fine and have proved to be sufficient.  Further punishing those of us who have successfully implemented back into society and are far removed from our convictions only goes to cause greater pain to our families.  Please do not put these unneeded, unwarranted restrictions into our lives.  It's simply not fair to those close to us who have given much to support and stand by our sides.

As a citizen, I would like to speak to you personally regarding this, since this proposed amendment would do great damage to the lives of so many people who are doing their best to give back to our society.
 
Thank you!

Most sincerely,
Charles

 

3rd Response to Posting #186
From: Rodney
Date:  01/15/2010

Mr. Athey,

I recently had a chance to review bill HB1004 and I'm rather concerned with some of the wording. It includes school bus stops? If you go out into the county, the school bus stops at just about every other house on every road. If each stop is classified under this bill as a "School bus stop" you'd be throwing almost every registered sex offender out of their homes. Also it don't specify if the day care center is private or public. There are so many "private" day care centers in the state, licensed and unlicensed that                   its almost impossible to know where they all are.

Also this bill would include even minor crimes such as misdemeanors. Did you know that some misdemeanors have no more of a criminal penalty than speeding are currently included in the registry? I'm sure you intent is not to include misdemeanor crimes. Imposing a felony conviction for a misdemeanor crime does seem to be overkill.

It says its not retroactive but the only non-retroactive part is the establishment of one of these locations after conviction. What about all the registered sex offenders that already live within the additional restricted areas? I'm sure you don't intent on putting them all out on the street? I don't know about you but I'd rather not have sex offenders as a mobile population with no known residence or having to move from already established residences.

We just need to take a look at the negative backlash by overly restrictive requirements like these that they have enacted in other states like Florida.

Can you tell me why this was worded in such a way and why we need these types of overly restrictive requirements?

Rodney

 

4th Response to Posting #186
From: Bob
Date:  01/15/2010

Dear Delegate Clifford L. Athey, Jr.,

The new sex offender law you are sponsoring, HB1004 does nothing to protect citizens, is senseless and is a clear waste of my tax dollars. Over the past years, Virginia Legislators have without considering accurate facts, changed and added multiple Sex Offender Laws including changing all offenses to violent offenses; even though no violence was used, and include upgrading offenses retroactively. Your sponsored Bill, HB1004 is absolutely senseless, protects no one. It is costly, and the only thing you will accomplish is hurting innocent children and families of people on the registry, widespread homelessness, families being torn apart, further unemployment, and people on the registry NOT registering. Instead of intent on destroying people on the registry, why not consider reforming Virginia's sex offender laws to make sense.  

Today, there are a large number of people on the Virginia Sex Offender registry (nearly 17,000 and growing) that is absolutely no threat to society. In fact there is a large population of people on your Sex Offender internet site that were previously evaluated by Virginia court appointed Sex Offender experts as no threat to society. Due to the SORNA law implementation of 2006, the law was changed for people who proved no threat to society, having court orders to be removed from Sex Offender Registry websites, and then retroactively placed back on the website as Violent Sex Offenders. Soon, there will be millions on the registry, with the extraordinary few who might be truly dangerous hidden among the many. This was never the goal of the registry to punitively punish people, innocent family members such as children.

These mindless and punitive retroactive changes to US Laws, place thousands of people back on the Sex Offender registry against the original registry intent. 

Now, you have so many people (thousands) on the registry; and intentionally there is no filtering process to tell who is truly dangerous... It appears your legislation; HB1004 is also desired to impact innocent children, parents, siblings and all relatives of people on the registry.  Is it customary for Virginia's legislators to intentionally harm innocent children of the people on your registry?  Alternatively, do you consider these children and family members/people as in the thousands collateral damage? 

In fact, your proposed law HB1004 is mindless and protects no children at all, only more punishment for people on the registry. However, it does succeed in harming innocent children of people on the registries. These people have already paid a dear price to society, and I see these new laws concocted as a way outside any benefit other than punitively segregating/zoning a class of people with no rights, further making them Praia’s of society. 

Segregating a class of people to the point they have no civil rights and promote violence against them and their innocent families. For example, Virginia's legislation on Sex Offenders is punitive and looks similar to the old segregation “Jim Crow” laws of the past. The Sex Offender laws keep Sex Offenders from voting, being able to obtain employment, being able to exist in a community, required to hire an attorney to enforce court orders deemed invalid by retroactive legislation and a plethora of other losses of civil liberties. Finally, your proposed legislation HB1004 promotes harassment and threats and absolutely nothing is done about it from any agency.

Losses of civil liberties such as zoning sex offenders out of Virginia's society has similarly failed across the country and harms the innocent families of the people on the registry. After supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States for 23 years, I never dreamed I would ever see a legally condoned subhuman class of American people, afforded no protection or rights under the US Constitution.

Again, what about the children of Sex Offenders and the impact your proposed laws have on them?  What about the condoned legalized hatred directed at the innocent children of Sex Offenders from neighbors, school mates and the condoned mental abuse they receive from non Sex Offender adults? What about the harassment, impact and death threats promoted by Virginia's legislation towards Sex Offender spouses and young children? These numbers are in the thousands!

I see your legislation and laws as offering no hope for people on the Virginia sex offender registry to be any part of any society. Now you want to ZONE them out. Even though the majority of Sex Offenders on the registry are NOT predators as you portray. How does prohibiting residence within 500 feet of premises of a day care, school or any area protect children? HB1004 looks more aligned to “Jim Crow” legislation, and what I saw in Germany’s final solution camps. The vague laws you propose are nothing more than a waste of fiscal resources and protect no one. Factual FBI statistics clearly shows Sex Offenders have the lowest recidivism rate of any criminal offense, even though FBI statistics include violating probation rules such as drinking alcohol as Sex Offender recidivism. Virginia legislators tout 100 percent recidivism with no cure.

I urge you to drop HB1004, and instead focus to reform sex offender laws to put only people who truly are dangerous on the registry, legitimately and fairly screen people to determine if they are even dangerous rather than by a Virginia statue. Legislators will then find an extraordinarily small number of people on the registry are manageable. In doing so enables society to know who truly might be a danger. Put the scarce fiscal resources into prevention, and afford people on the Virginia registry a chance to contribute to society and attempt get their lives back. 

Bob

 

5th Response to Posting #186
From: Maureen
Date:  01/16/2010

Delegate Athey,

Please explain the constitutionality of HB1004, which you are sponsoring.

 I want you to specifically address this issue to me a resident of Virginia.  As a delegate, it is your job to clarify how this is constitutional.

This is UnAmerican legislation at its worst. 

You are taking away the basic rights given to us as our nation began over 200 hundred                   years ago.

From our Virginia Bill of Rights

Section 1. Equality and rights of men.

That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.

1. Clarify how this legislation does not deprive these people of the enjoyment of life, liberty, means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining  happiness and safety.
Your legislation would:

Cause the dissolution of the family, forcing their hand to sell their home in a down economy and then sentencing the former offender to remain a vagrant for life

Section 16. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.

2.  Clarify how your legislation will continue to entitle these people to the free exercise of religion.

Your legislation would make attending church or temple impossible.

From the U.S. Bill of Rights

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the                   free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of  grievances.

3. Clarify how your legislation in the Commonwealth can be passed when our Federal                   Congress cannot even make a law which prohibits the free exercise of religion.


Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

4.  Clarify how your legislation is not cruel or unusual
Simply put this is a ‘Breach of Contract’ on the part of the Commonwealth of Virginia - reference all the guaranteed rights listed above.  

As both a citizen of Virginia and the great United States of America, I believe that you                   have forgotten that the power is in US, the people.  YOU serve us.  I am ashamed to see a Delegate propose such legislation that violates the rights of fellow citizens to the point of taking their basic rights away.  Clearly you are not informed.  Please read the Richard Wright book delivered by the RSOL this week.

Get your facts straight.  It is your duty to the people to make informed decisions that are CONSTITUTIONALLY SOUND.

Remember, you serve ALL Virginians, even the ones who are incarcerated.  After they  pay their debt to society, they are DEBT-FREE. 

I await your specific clarification of this imbecile legislation.  If you believe in the true                  foundation of what America is, then you will withdraw this unconstitutional legislation                    immediately.

Maureen

 

6th Response to Posting #186
From: James
Date:  01/16/2010

 

Dear Mr. Belefski, (Mr. Athey’s Legislative Aide)

Thank you in advance for learning how to write sex offender legislation that will  improve public safety.  HB1004 is clearly not an example of such an effort.

To understand the proven ineffectiveness of HB1004 and similar efforts, please borrow Delegate Athey's copy of Dr. Richard Wright's book, Sex Offender Laws: Failed Policies, New Directions.  Dr. Wright states, "...American policy responses to prevent or address sexual offending, particularly those enacted within the last twenty years have largely failed."  They have not reduced sex offenders recidivism rates, not provided safety, healing, or support for victims, not reflected the scientific research on sexual victimization, offending, and risk, or not provided successful strategies for prevention. "... these policies have failed by choice.  Policymakers choose to focus on the most heinous sex offenders while ignoring the most common sexual threats that people face."

In Part III - Policy Alternatives, Dr. Wright states:

1.  "...rigorous and routine evaluations must be done to assess the impact and efficacy                    of  these policies."

Sadly, many if not most Virginia sex offenders have been required to register automatically because they violated a particular statute, not because they have been evaluated and determined to pose a threat to society.  HB1004 is neither based on research nor includes any future evaluation of its effectiveness.  As a Court-certified Expert Witness in survey research, and with 18 years' experience as a Research Assistant, you certainly understand that HB1004 is not research-based and does not  enhance public safety.

2.  "The researchers found that residence restrictions would not be an effective measure in reducing recidivism.  Of the 224 offenders, direct contact with a child victim within 1 mile of the offender's home occurred in only 16 instances.  Additionally, none of those 16 cases involved contact with the victim near a school, park, or day care."

Virginia has followed the national trend in establishing counterproductive, ineffective                   residency restrictions that appear to have been based on political expediency, not   public safety.  HB1004 seeks to enhance current policy that is useless in  reducing sex offenses and sex offender recidivism.  HB1004 does not enhance public safety.

Thank you for working with Delegate Athey to withdraw the legislation. 

If your office is interested in introducing effective sex offender legislation, please do so                  only after a thorough review of Part III of Dr. Wright's book and extensive discussions with experts in the area. 

Please refrain from introducing legislation that may be politically expedient, but of no public safety value.  HB1004 is an excellent example of "failed by choice" legislation that Virginia does not need.

James

 

7th Response to Posting #186
From: Mike
Date:  01/16/2010

Delegate Athey,

Kindly explain what, exactly, it is you hope to accomplish with HB1004.  Several studies and research (links provided below) indicate that the measures of this proposed piece of legislation will do nothing to protect the children of Virginia.  Surely you proposed this legislation out of some other factual evidence of its effectiveness, and (since I seem to be incapable of finding such evidence) I will gratefully receive from  you said evidence without delay.  

Failing to provide the research behind HB 1004 would lead Virginians to believe that                     this legislation was put together out of nothing more than emotion - namely fear and  anger.  It's easy to push through legislation against a population the public is angry at, and parents are fearful of.  However, constructing laws out of fear and anger can only  make the situation worse, which is what the research mentioned above confirms.  HB 1004 makes the politician look good to the angry and fearful public, while only compounding the problem.  

There are 16,600 Virginian families that will be affected by this bill.  Families.  Sex offenders have families too, who despite the offender's mistakes, stand with them.  This law not only affects the offenders, but everyone around them.  Many will become homeless.  Please outline the plan for tracking all the newly homeless offenders, and how the state will care for the homeless families of the offenders.  All this to accomplish nothing in protecting Virginia's children.

Virginia's children deserve more.  If you want to gain political points, and stick it to the sex offenders, at the cost of Virginia's children, then keep pushing this bill through.  But if you really want to help protect children, which I assume you do, then prudence dictates that carefully researched laws (rather than haphazard, feel-good laws) be crafted and enacted.  The people at Reform Sex Offender Laws of Virginia (RSOL of  Virginia) are offering their assistance in educating you and providing the research and studies that exist on the topic.

A legislator that is interested in protecting Virginia's children would withdraw HB 1004, and do some research into some laws that actually help.

Links to applicable research:
Residential Proximity to Schools and Daycare Centers:
Influence on sex offense recidivism, An empirical analysis by Jill Levenson, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Human Services at Lynn University, December 23, 2008: 
Residential proximityto schools and daycare centers.PDF

Sex Offender Residence Restrictions: Unintended Consequences and Community Reentry, by Jill S. Levenson 2007:
Sex Offender Residence Restrictions: Unintended Consequences and Community Reentry.PDF

When Evidence Is Ignored: Residential Restrictions For Sex Offenders
By Richard Tewksbury and Jill Levenson 
http://www.aca.org/publications/pdf/Tewksbury.pdf

More books, studies and reports can be found on RSOL of Virginia's website, http://www.rsolvirginia.org/reports.html

A response from any other than Delegate Athey is unacceptable.  I look forward to his                   immediate response.

Regards,
Mike

 

8th Response to Posting #186
From: Sally
Date:  01/16/2010

Dear Del. Athey,

Please withdraw HB 1004 because it perpetuates the myth that our children are safer  because of toughening up ineffective sex abuse laws.  Not only are they ineffective but there is mounting evidence they are actually putting our children in more danger.

Human Rights Watch studied our sex offender laws in the U.S. for two years and concluded that reform is badly needed.  Primarily, overly broad sex offender registries are distracting limited law enforcement attention away from the really dangerous offenders.  Only 7% of persons listed on sex offender registries prey on strangers; the rest do not pose a risk to the general society.  Many persons on the registries are innocent, having been charged by conniving teenagers or ex-spouses who needed no witnesses or corroborating evidence in court.

The Human Rights Watch in their publication "No Easy Answers:  Sex Offender Laws in the U.S." assert that limiting the registry to dangerous sex predators will greatly help protect our children.  It states, "There is no inherent contradiction between protecting the rights of children and protecting the rights of former offenders.  Both are protected if registration is limited to former offenders who have been individually assessed as dangerous, and only for so long as they pose a high or medium risk of re-offending; if community notification is restricted on a need-to-know basis to those who genuinely can benefit from knowledge about dangerous former offenders in their midst;                   and if residency restrictions are imposed, if at all, only as part of individual supervision measures established on a case-by-case basis and periodically reviewed, and with child offenders exempted from sex offender laws unless a panel determines them to be of significant risk to the community.  We urge legislators and the public to support reform to sex offender laws along these lines."

Please be part of the solution and do not add to the problem.  The lives of our children                   are too important to increase risk to them by perpetuating worsened ineffective laws.

Sincerely
Sally

                       

9th Response to Posting #186
From: Colleen
Date:  01/19/2010

Dear RSOL of VA,

I just called "our" State Trooper for District ______ under the guise of asking him how                  the distance is measured for the 500 ft rule.  I told him the reason I was asking because I was concerned about HB1004, the additional places included, and how it would immediately displace many families.

He told me that a similar bill was proposed 2 years ago and when the legislature came to the Sex Offender unit, they asked that the 2007 bill NOT be passed because of situations like Miami and Georgia.  He said he hopes that it doesn't pass and if it does, that a grandfather clause is included.  I asked him to take a look at HB1004 to become familiar with it because it doesn't include a grandfather clause. 

But, all in all, he says such restrictions do more harm than good. 

It felt like the Sex Offender Unit overall doesn't support more restrictions.

Colleen

10th Response to Posting #186
From: Fred and Jan
Date:  01/20/2010

Dear RSOL of VA,

Since last week, after being notified of House Bill #1004, we have been busy little bees.

We made numerous calls to the office of Delegate Athey in both Richmond, Virginia                     and at the Front Royal office. We have no response from his office at this point.

I contacted my local Delegate, __________ and was received well by his assistant, ____________ and had approximately 45 minutes on the phone with him. We discussed the vagueness of the law at certain points and he assured me that Delegate ___________ was thoroughly informed of my concerns of the specific stipulations in the law and especially how the school bus stop procedures in the mountains of Southwest VA are quite different than in other areas. He also explained Delegate ___________ of our other concerns and then proceeded to inform us that we must understand that Delegate ___________ is in a political quagmire of sorts because of public perception versus the reality of facts in these laws and the possible ramifications that misunderstanding and ignorance can produce.

The assistant informed us that we could possibly get the information from the school board at the government facility. So we both went there and were informed that the information as to the actual locations of any bus stops could be given only to parents.  We explained to them that we live on a specific street, but they refused to let us know presently until they check with legal counsel.

We then contacted our attorney and told him the situation and his secretary informed                    us that he would call us back on what it would take to procure these, what we consider public documents. We wanted to know the specific locations as of January 13, 2010.

Delegate _________ assistant was extremely helpful and articulate, but the powers that  be don’t like information given to the public, because it could limit their manipulations  in the future. It is a form of hysteria and political fear driven through ignorance.

We did tell all that we contacted that we are politically libertarian/conservative and did not appreciate the misuse of ex post facto law. We informed them that we are far    from endorsing any Republican that advocates the shredding of the Constitution while pushing a progressive agenda at the expense of civil rights.

The fact that a sex offender can not get information on where the school bus stops are                     to protect himself from new laws including prohibiting himself living near school bus stops shows that there is a problem with this law.

The sex offender can not keep himself from being in violation when the hysteria and overprotective fear of the schools for children makes them unwilling to give open information on the locations of these bus stops. This is a real catch 22!

At the end of our conversation, the assistant asked me if we knew you or your organization. We asked him, after informing him that we did know you, if he had a copy of Professor Wright’s book (http://www.rsolvirginia.org/blog_178.html), and he had it in the office. He seemed to infer that he had already developed a rapport of sorts with your organization. He had nothing bad to say and I perceive that as a good thing.

Fred and Jan

 

11th Response to Posting #186
From: Mike
Date:  01/27/2010

Dear Delegate Athey,

I am writing in response to a bill you recently introduced, specifically HB1004 Sex offender;       prohibits residing in proximity to children. As a proud resident of the Commonwealth of               Virginia, I must point out some serious reservations I have about this bill. First of all, there are serious constitutional questions raised by a bill such as you have proposed, as lawmakers in         several states which have tried similar schemes have found. If I read the wording of the bill      correctly, the proposed new restrictions would apply to anyone on the sex offender registry   whose offense was committed against a minor. This would be a retroactive, rather than an    ongoing punishment, a punishment which is explicitly prohibited in both the United States          Constitution and the Virginia Commonwealth Constitution. Retroactive laws concerning sex offenders have been struck down as unconstitutional in a number of states, including Kentucky (Commonwealth v. Baker) Indiana (Jensen v. State of Indiana) and Ohio (Hyle v. Porter). In    addition, the the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has found that the retroactive           portions of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) violate the U.S.     Constitution's prohibition of ex post facto laws (United States of America v. Juvenile Male    Defendant 07-30290). The Georgia Supreme Court has twice struck down retroactive   application of sex offender laws, and has labeled a law strikingly similar to the one you have proposed as over broad and over reaching.

Also, while the bill may sound attractive to some, it is a "one size fits all" solution to a complex problem. It lumps all offenders into the same category, violent, non-violent, contact and non-  contact offenses, when simple common sense tells you that this can't be the case. It also            assumes that all convicted sex offenders are destined to re-offend. The fact of the matter is that    sex offenders have among the lowest recidivism rates of any type of criminal offenders. The   U.S. Justice Department's statistics show a sexually related re-offense rate of 5-7% for convicted            sex offenders. Only murderers have a lower recidivism rate. Every other type of criminal             offender has a much higher rate of re-offense. Also, according to the Justice Department, fully 96% of all sex offenses will be committed by first time offenders, people who will not appear on the Virginia sex offender registry.

There are numerous studies that indicate that residency in close proximity to schools, parks, bus stop, etc., have no effect on re-offense rates for sex offenders. The Minnesota Department of   Corrections, and the Colorado Sex Offender Management Board conducted extensive studies which showed that proximity to schools, parks playgrounds and such had no impact on    recidivism of sex offenders.

And finally, residency restrictions are simply bad policy. They foster homelessness and                unemployment among offenders, they force many offenders to go underground and dodge      registration requirements, they are an enforcement nightmare, and many states which have              tried to implement them are now in the process of rolling them back. In Iowa, where strict           residency restrictions were implemented, the Iowas Association of Sheriffs has lobbied the      legislature to repeal the restrictions because law enforcement has lost track of 65% of the state's   registrants, and do not have the manpower to enforce the restrictions. Ohio, which         implemented harsh residency restrictions has had their state and local courts inundated with     lawsuits, overburdening the courts and costing the state millions of dollars to defend. Many of those cases have reversed the restrictions on a local level.

Human Rights Watch, an internationally respected human rights organization published a            highly enlightening report on residency restrictions entitled "No Easy Answers: Sex Offender Laws in the U.S." ( http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2007/09/11/no-easy-answers ). I strongly urge you to take an hour or so of time to read this report. It illustrates better than I ever could the folly of the bill you have proposed.

In a time when Virginians are faced with tough choices on budgetary issues, I feel it would be      foolhardy to pass a bill such as you have proposed, which would cost the Commonwealth millions to implement and enforce, and could conceivably cost many millions more in defense of lawsuits brought by registrants in light of the questionable constitutional issues involved in the ex post facto application of the proposed law. I urge you strongly to withdraw the bill, it is time to stop creating fear and hysteria over "sex offenders", targeting a group which statistics   show is one in which the vast majority will never re-offend,  and start examining ways to monitor the truly dangerous... repeat offenders and violent contact offenders.

Thank you for your time, and again, I urge you to read the Human Rights Watch report.

Sincerely,

Mike

 

12th Response to Posting #186
From: Erin
Date:  01/29/2010

Dear Senator Holtzman and Delegate Albo,
 
It is my understanding that you have become a recent supporter of HB1004.  I would like to         express to you how disheartened I am with your choice to support such a harsh and inhumane bill.
 
In the state of Virginia, we have slightly under 17,000 registrants on our registry, which is 1 out of every 183 people.  Because we have no tier system in this state, HB1004 will effect ALL registrants, violent and non-violent.  They will not be allowed to reside within 500 ft. of school, day care facility, bus stop, community center, recreation center, public park and playground, and public swimming pool.  While there are violent deviants who have indeed committed heinous acts, there is the offender who is at the opposite end of the spectrum in the level of their offense.  That person is punished just as harshly as the most violent offender.  Furthermore, if offenders become homeless, we will lose track of the ones who are truly to be feared because they will no longer be willing and able to cooperate with the registry.  The requirement in this bill would have a profound negative effect on people who do not need to be punished so severely and an equally negative effect on the citizens of Virginia in general.
 
You say you are all about protecting children.  Have you considered that many of these offenders have innocent children who will suffer tremendously in numerous ways by imposing this type of residency restriction?  With every one person you take down, rest assured you are severely impacting several other innocent lives, depending on the size of the family.  This residency restriction sets these people up to fail and would make it nearly impossible for a reformed offender to provide for themselves, let alone the people he/she is responsible for.  You will be driving up the unemployment rate as well as the homeless rate.  This is unconstitutional and I fear to think about the number of lawsuits our state will be slammed with.
 
If you honestly believe that this is a method of protection for our people, then why draw the line at sex offenders.  All crimes leave a negative impact on their victim, but we cannot drive all people guilty of committing a crime out of our communities.
 
Please remove your mask of "we are here to help the people" when indeed supporting a bill as     absurd as this will only cause deterioration of our state.
 
Sincerely,
Erin

 

13th Response to Posting #186
From: Jenette
Date:  01/29/2010

Dear Delegate Clifford L. Athey, Jr.,

I plead you to drop HB1004, and focus on reforming Virginia sex offender laws and screen people to find out who is truly dangerous on the registry rather than by Virginia statues. I am a sixteen year old girl whose life has been enormously damaged from your sex offender laws. I sit in my government class at school and hear how we have a state constitution, civil liberties, freedoms, and from my experience of your laws, it turns out to be all lies. I know because your sex offender laws have taken my life away, hurt me and have taken away my ability to live a normal life. Your sex offender laws promote people to harass me and my family and they make us outcast.

I live in fear. Fear from adults in our neighborhood who harasses me and my family daily, threaten to kill my father, spy at us with binoculars and cameras, scream names at my brother and mother and father every day for the past four years. I live in fear people at school will find out my father is a sex offender; continue to harass me about my “sex offender father”, the lost friends, and your laws make me a labeled outcast. I live in fear someone will see my father’s picture on the internet and our home address with a map pinpointing my house and kill me and my family because of your laws.

Eight years ago, my father had a drinking problem and while he was drunk he inappropriately touched my adopted sister in our home. My father and mother went to a family counselor and my father described what a stupid thing he had done while he was drunk and the counselor turned in him to the Police. My father accepted responsibility for his actions, and up until that time he had a clean record and life. A few years later, he went to Virginia court and was screened by court appointed experts who determined him as no threat to society and he was removed off the sex offender registry. In 2006, another law was passed in Virginia and he ended up right back on the registry as a violent sex offender. Even though he had a court order stating he was no danger to society, and no chance to present his case, he ended up back on the registry. In reality you have my entire family on the registry with him adding new punishment laws every year.      

My father took responsibility for his actions, and served his punishment, but yet that’s not good enough for the Delegates of Virginia who act irresponsible in passing new laws without considering facts, or even caring what the impacts are on innocent people who live with so called sex offenders. Innocent people like my mother, brother, sister, aunts, uncles, cousins and me. Thousands of children in Virginia are hurt from your laws, and you claim you are protecting children? How does prohibiting residence within 500 feet of premises of a day care, school or any area protect children? Maybe it helps Virginia Delegates re-election campaigns, but consider the damage you have done to my family and to children who have grown up under your legislation, children like me.
  
Sincerely,
Jenette

 

14th Response to Posting #186
From: Joe
Date:  01/30/2010

Dear Senator Vogel,

I wanted to express my disappointment in your support of HB1004.

This bill will negatively affect many offenders that are trying to or already have rebuilt their lives. People that have put down roots may end up being homeless. Yes, they are sex offenders, but they have also served their time and are trying to move forward with their lives. I would hope that at some point in time their punishment would come to an end, but with legislation like this that is not likely to happen. I myself am a sex offender.

I have completed everything required by the state and have been off of probation for some time now. I am gainfully employed (which is no small thing in this economy) and also take care of my 74 year old mother. Who would take care of her if I were forced to move?

I hope that you will reconsider your support of this bill.

 I thank you for taking the time to read this e-mail.

Joe

 

15th Response to Posting #186
From: Fred and Jan
Date:  01/29/2010

Delegate Athey,

We have left some literature at our Delegate’s local office in ________, Virginia, which       document the ramifications of residency restrictions. The state of Kansas had to implement a moratorium on these residential laws in order to relieve those in power that had implemented those laws from the consequences and collateral damage produced by the laws.

Implementing new layers of law does not necessarily show intelligence, nor absolute truth, but rather situational ethics, which empower those controlling through the media and other fear propagators, rather than those knowing the empirical evidence of the consequences of such laws (See Professor Wright's book).

The first registration laws were implemented In California to prohibit homosexual behavior in public places. Even this registry was not made public. How times have changed! Those that were against sodomy in public places have now disappeared and legislators no longer look to implement laws for punishing adultery. They have located a new bogey man of "stranger danger" rooted in fear and hysteria.

We hope the Republicans and/or our new Governor have not become so politically correct that they want post-pubescent young men and women on registries for the rest of their lives for three years age differences. Most scholars agree that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was around fifteen when she was with Joseph and Joseph was much older when they went to Jerusalem to pay taxes in order to be married.

Today, Mary the mother of Jesus, would be incapable of making her own decisions and Joseph would be in prison as a "pedophile" (the true definition of pedophile does not fit).

HB 1004 and the residency restrictions are not conducive for the safety of children and they will be very expensive because of numerous lawsuits that have to do with private property ownership.

We suggest that all concerned read the testimony of Jacob Wetterling's mother as well as the empirical evidence that show how residential restrictions can cause violent offenders to roam    the streets at night, rather than be in a secure location.

Feel good politics, which now endorses sodomy through the Supreme Court, create more laws    to destroy more families in the best interest of the village. If court precedent always equated         with the betterment of society, we would still have slavery for blacks. Now those in power and the political predators titillated by power, rather than reason and education, have come out of the closet for the progressives they really are. We truly need a tea party that will return us to the Constitution which does not give us our rights, but lists the rights which come from the Creator. His Name is Jesus.

Remember, in Mein Kampf, Hitler praised Abe Lincoln for proving that the state must rule         over the masses by a central power. Are we today allowing federal progressives to extort from   the states monies unethically? This extortion is done in a seemingly legal fashion, when the          state disagrees with the law forced on the states through federal pressure? Boy, Virginia really needs that 10% for compliance with the the Adam Walsh Act! What about the grand cost of         compliance which is much greater?

90% of future offenses will be committed by family members, relatives, those in affairs with        someone they know. Why not focus on healing and restoration, rather than redefining the word "punishment" which these new laws actually implement, regardless of how the smoke and             mirrors of those in power present the smoke to the public?

Being a Pentecostal and believing in forgiveness and restoration for all sin when repented of, we hereby acknowledge that only the Savior can change and redeem, contrary to what Hitler            thought. Jesus Christ is the answer and He is the Restorer.

Fred and Jan

16th Response to Posting #186
From: Mike #2
Date:  01/30/2010

Dear Delegate Albo and Senator Vogel,

I am writing to you because I am concerned that both of you have chosen to co-sponsor Delegate Athey's bill, HB1004.

The laws of the state of Virginia regarding where violent sex offenders can reside are already very restrictive. However, to widen these restrictions on thousands of other non-violent sex offenders makes no sense at all. Driving people from their homes and families will only serve the opposite   purpose of your noble intentions of protecting children .

Families, including children will lose their homes as they are forced to move. More sex offenders   will become homeless, and quite possibly they and their families will become a financial burden on the state. More children will be harmed by this law rather than be protected. The laws that you     pass not only affect the former offenders, but also their innocent children and families.

I am sure you realize that there is very little chance of harm coming to our children from non-    violent sex offenders who are strangers to those children, regardless of where the offender lives.. The majority of non-violent sex offending occurs within families in their own homes. The only           time that I could see where this bill would make sense is if it applied to repeat offenders. To punish those who have long ago served their sentence, and are now living their lives as law abiding         citizens does not make any sense.

Thank you for considering my thoughts.

Mike

17th Response to Posting #186
From: Patrick
Date:  02/01/2010

Delegate Albo,

Before I launch into an area of disagreement and need to present fact to change your current         position, I want to let you know that your views on most matters overwhelmingly made it very         easy to once again vote for you this past November.  Thank you for your service.

You recently became a co-sponsor to bill HB 1004.  My view is that the bill is unnecessary and   counterproductive.  Current law identifies and addresses the highest risk offenders.  The proposed law expands these added restrictions to all that are required to register with the State Police.

Well intended laws can produce unintended consequences.  I believe this bill is one.  The two     primary points I would make is that the added locations could conceivably cover the majority of the Commonwealth and our community; and, is unfairly punitive to those who have complied with the current law and now may be forced to be separated from their family, even become homeless, and push them to a new level of helplessness, frustration, and disenfranchise.  Actually, the current law prevents an offender from attending a Church where children attend – I know of no Churches that prohibit children – so we take organized religion out of the lives of those that likely need it the most already.  Even the State Police agrees that those with stable homes and jobs are of far less concern for recidivism.  Statistics, or even antidotal accounts, do not support such a far reaching and punitive action as is proposed in this bill.

I hope that you do not conclude that I am a un-informed social advocate.  Far from it.  As a retired FBI Agent, I believe in justice.  From my 25 years of being part of the criminal justice system, I also firmly believe that once an individual pays their debt to society, it is wrong to brand and         burden a person with continued punitive actions.  I realize we need to protect our communities,    but if we want to ever see someone assimilate back into our society as a productive citizen, we    need to stop flogging them.

I think e-mails are a good form to state facts – not to persuade or express feeling.  I have tried to present my position in fact.  If my position continues to differ from yours, I would welcome the    opportunity to meet with you, so that you could come to understand my feeling and hopefully persuade you to a different position.

Patrick