Posted on 02/09/2007 5:47:00 PM PST by Diana in Wisconsin
A new state law forcing sexual predators to wear tracking devices for the rest of their lives is unconstitutional, according to three University of Wisconsin-Madison law professors.
The measure violates privacy rights and amounts to punishment and warrantless surveillance when applied to offenders who aren't on parole or government supervision, the professors said in a letter sent to Corrections Secretary Matthew Frank on Feb. 3.
"A clearer example of governmental intrusion into personal privacy is difficult to imagine," wrote law professors Walter Dickey, Byron Lichstein and Meredith Ross.
The law's main author, state Rep. Scott Suder, R-Abbotsford, called the professors "Monday morning quarterbacks" with weak arguments.
"They might want to talk to the victims of these crimes before they make such outrageous statements," Suder said. "Nothing is going to stop us form implementing GPS. We are on very solid constitutional grounds."
The law, which takes effect July 1, requires the Corrections Department to use global positioning technology to track offenders found to be sexually violent. Tracking would begin when they're released from prison and continue for the rest of their lives. The requirement would also extend to serious child molesters.
The law calls on Corrections to establish zones where offenders could not linger and ensure the bracelets immediately alert the agency or local police if they violate those zones.
Corrections officials asked for $23.7 million and nearly 235 additional positions in the two-year budget starting July 1 to run the tracking system.
The professors argue forcing offenders on supervised release to wear trackers is unnecessary because they're already being supervised and forcing offenders who have completed their government supervision is unconstitutional. Corrections has no authority over them, they said.
The measure doesn't authorize police to stop offenders from moving into off-limits zones, the professors point out. That means the measure doesn't protect the public, negating a possible legal defense.
Constantly wearing a GPS unit that must be recharged every 12 hours amounts to punishment and warrantless surveillance, the professors wrote.
"Constant, lifetime GPS tracking is physically and psychologically burdensome," they said.
Anne Sappenfield, an attorney with the state Legislative Council, said in a Jan. 3 letter to state Rep. Mark Pocan -- the only member of the state Assembly to vote against the law -- the measure could be unconstitutional because it applies to sex offenders who were convicted before the law was enacted.
Suder insisted the law is designed to protect the public, not punish offenders. He said the law allows Corrections to write rules on how to handle zone incursions.
Pocan, D-Madison, a member of the Legislature's Joint Finance Committee, called the law a "knee-jerk" reaction.
"The bill was written in such a way to say 'hey, we're tough on sex offenders' instead of actually being tough on sex offenders," Pocan said.
Questions should be raised about the law now, before the Legislature releases millions of dollars in the upcoming state budget for the tracking system, Pocan said. That money could be better spent on helping Corrections develop ways to determine if individual offenders might re-offend, he said.
Frank's executive assistant, Susan Crawford, said Corrections has run into a myriad of problems as it prepares to implement the bill.
The law provides no penalty for offenders who refuse to wear the trackers, Crawford said. Corrections has no authority to return a sex offender on GPS who has completed his sentence to prison, and nothing in the law allows police to stop them for a violation, she said.
"It points to a need for the Legislature to ... fix some of these defects," she said.
The Democrats/socialist/liberals will do anything to continue to turn this country into a hell hole. Anyone ever think why we have so many sexual predators in the first place?
Just read your post #1 and no further, had to post this:
"Shooting Fish in a Barrel" Sarcasm Torpedo ARMED. FIRE!!
...as Bill Clinton breathes a sigh of relief.
Cheers!
I can't wait to hear Bill O'Reilly when he hears this.
Got some figures for your "thousands of wrongfully convicted" comment, or is this personal experience talking?
Thank you!
If an offended has served their time and isn't on parole, then there's no legal reason for them to be tracked. If they're so dangerous to society that they can't be trusted, then they should be sentenced to life without parole.
I'm venturing off the topic, but had to add to that.
I have a liberal friend that is well educated, a good father and a respected person. He commented once (I believe only a little in jest) that he thought being a Republican ought to be against the law.
thanks for commenting - I'll make sure I put the /s in there next time.
I really dont care what the three wacko leftist commie law profs think. They're libs so therefore the thought process is all screwd up.
You know why? Because liberalism is a mental disorder.
I really like your thinking.
If they're guilty of rape, or child molestation, execute them. Problem solved.
Amen...
"To him who answers without hearing, to him it is sin and folly."
This seems to be the biggest sin and folly of FR and that is why I seldom come here any more. Quite a few thoughtful souls to be sure, but spoiled by a bunch of know it all puffy chests from whom I can gain nothing but being inured to this sin.
"How does that work? Does each get charged with abusing the other? "
I just realized I was wrong there. The kids were graduating HS, so the guy was 18, and the girl 17. The girl was 18 when the baby was born. Hospital turned them in, because 9 months before, she was 18.
LMAO. So very true! I speak from personal experience cause I USED to be one!
The best way to frighten a liberal is to tell them that you used to be one of them. Then tell them you grew up, matured, came to your senses and became a conservative. They are incapable of comprehending it!
LMAO I bet they damn near exploded when you told'em that. The movie "Mars attacks" comes to mind.
If we don't want to feed and house them forever (it's expensive) and they can't be let free (and they absolutely can't) then sell them or give them to the municipalities as a non-paid workforce to be used for garbage collection, maintaining parks or other physical labor.
Before anyone says this is slavery, the 13th Amendment to the Constitution says "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
The zinger here is "except as a punishment for crime".
In every case they have been convicted of a heinous crime.
Either use them as free labor or sell them as property and use the profits from the sale to lower taxes.
Hey, we can also use Gitmo, since the democrats want to release all the terrorists.
Our local afternoon Conserva-Babe talk show host has people on her show from this organization all the time. It's very disturbing how many of these creeps are out there, just waiting to pounce on our kids. :(
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.