Recent surge in repeat sex offender arrests

The News-Register (OR) ^ | June 19, 2003 | MATTHEW D. LaPLANTE

[Clint Williams]

Eight of the last 14 people indicted for felony sex crimes in Yamhill County were previously convicted of similar offenses, a review of court records shows.

The recent surge in repeat offender arrests, which began in late April with the arrest of two-time prior offender Chad Earl Updike, has authorities baffled.

Deputy District Attorney Cynthia Easterday expressed surprise at the numbers. "It's more uncommon than anything," she said.

Probation officer Randy Settel, who specializes in the supervision of sex offenders, said he noticed the recent spike in recidivism but couldn't explain it. "Most offenders have very few priors," he said.

The record backs up those assessments. Between Jan. 1 and April 24 - when Updike was arrested - only one person indicted on new sex-related charges had a prior history of such crimes.

The spike doesn't appear to have been influenced by a change in police and court services implemented in March as a result of state budget cuts, either. A review of records in Polk and Benton counties - which have similar populations and demographics to Yamhill County - shows no such trend.

...

Authorities have charged 38 people with sex-related felonies since Jan. 1. There are about 300 registered sex offenders in Yamhill County.

There are few treatment options available for sex offenders in state and local correctional facilities, so most efforts are concentrated on intense monitoring once the felons are released.

Settel monitors his roster of about 90 offenders with mandated reporting, polygraphs and home visits. Some are involved in treatment programs, but not all.

Despite public fears, studies show that most don't reoffend.

But when Lewis was released after serving his latest prison term for abusing a 6-year-old boy, Settel told a group of concerned Lafayette citizens that there was no magic pill that would keep the man from reoffending.

"We can give them the tools to help make the right decisions, but we can't keep them from reoffending," Settel said.

[Clint Williams]

This was surprising to me. From these studies, I would have guessed 8 out of 14 to be the norm, not a surge.

[cweese]

"Settel told a group of concerned Lafayette citizens that there was no magic pill that would keep the man from reoffending."

...yes there is...it's called castration...

[The_Pickle]

I would suggest a proven rehabilitation treatment that includes "high speed lead injections to the upper cranium". This is a guarenteed technique and the offender will not repeat his offense after only a single treatment. Its cost effective as well, at about $0.07 per treatment, and at one treatment per offender it would go along way to reducing government spending. :)

[Mulder]

Its cost effective as well, at about $0.07 per treatment

I'm not sure if that is the best way to go.

If only that $0.07 were a non-recurring cost, would it come out on top. As it stands, however, that cost will be incurred every time a pervert, murderer, or enemy of the Constitution is dealt with. That's a pretty large number.

Therefore, a budget-oriented person might suggest buying some good rope. It might cost $20, but it is a one-time cost. Over the long term, it would be cheaper than "lead injections".

[The_Pickle]

While I agree that your method would be perhaps more cost effective, I would suggest a further addendum to my earlier sugestion and seize this unique opportunity to perhaps institute a policy that might actually generate revenue.

While I still favor my method of rehabilitation as the "penetration" of the offender, while effectivly rehabilitating him, carries with it certain "poetic" justices, your cost savings measure leads me to new areas of speculation.

Perhaps the institution of a state wide "lottery" where law abiding citizens could, for only a dollar, get a chance to actively participate in said "rehabilitation"? Not only would this address the cost issue but would also generate much needed revenue in a time of great economic need and allow local citizens to feel more a part of our local criminal justice system.

Any further input on your part would of course be greatly appreciated. :)

[Mulder]

Perhaps the institution of a state wide "lottery" where law abiding citizens could, for only a dollar, get a chance to actively participate in said "rehabilitation"?

You've addressed the revenue side of the equation, which has the potential to dwarf whatever small cost differences exist in the particular "method of justice".

Instead of a "lottery", perhaps more money would be made by having an auction to determine the winner. Maybe they could try both, and see which one raises the most money.

[The_Pickle]

I would suggest a test period of six months for each method and the one that raises the most revenue during it's test peroid would then be instituted as State policy. As a matter of fact certain nationwide revenue potential exsists as I am sure law abiding citizens across the United States would wish an opportunity to participate in this unique form of justice. That is until other States Government institute similar policies, but then, Oregon has always been a national leader in instituting new and exciting policy. :)