Sex offender management is one of the highest-profile issues in public safety today. Although states have enacted community notification laws as a means to protect communities from sexual offending, limited research has been conducted to examine the impact of these laws on public safety. As such, this study used a quasi-experimental design to examine the relationship, if any, between community notification legislation and sex offender rearrest. Sex offenders who were subject to community notification (n = 10,592, 61.7%) were compared to sex offenders who were not subject to community notification requirements (n = 6,573, 38.3%). Results indicate that sex offenders subject to community notification were rearrested twice as quickly (for a sexual offense) and 47% more quickly (for a nonsexual offense) than those not subject to community notification. The findings yield implications for sex offender interventions and public policies and suggest that notification may not be an effective strategy for significantly reducing sexual offenses.
AbelG. G.BeckerJ. V.Cunningham-RathnerJ.MittelmanM.RouleauJ. L. (1988). Multiple paraphilic diagnoses among sex offenders. Bulletin of the American Academy Psychiatry Law, 16, 153-168.
2.
AdkinsG.HuffD.StagebergP.PrellL.MuselS. (2000). The Iowa sex offender registry and recidivism. Des Moines, IA: Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning and Statistical Analysis Center.
3.
BarbareeH. E.MarshallW. L. (1988). Deviant sexual arousal, offense history, and demographic variables as predictors of reoffense among child molesters. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 6, 267-280.
4.
BarnoskiR. (2005). Sex offender sentencing in Washington State: Has community notification reduced recidivism?Olympia, WA: Washington Institute for Public Policy.
5.
BeauregardE.ProulxJ.RossmoD. K. (2005). Spatial patterns of sex offenders: Theoretical, empirical, and practical issues. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10, 579-603.
6.
BedarfA. R. (1995). Examining sex offender community notification laws. California Law Review, 83, 885-939.
7.
BerlinerL.SchramD.MillerL. L.MilloyC. D. (1995). A sentencing alternative for sex offenders: A study of decision making and recidivism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10, 487-502.
8.
Center for Sex Offender Management. (2007). Female sex offenders. Silver Spring, MD: Center for Effective Public Policy.
9.
Colorado Department of Public Safety. (2004). Report on safety issues raised by living arrangements for and location of sex offenders in the community. Denver, CO: Sex Offender Management Board.
10.
DempsterR. J.HartS. D. (2002). The relative utility of fixed and variable risk factors in discriminating sexual recidivists and nonrecidivists. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 14, 121-138.
11.
Division of Criminal Justice Services. (2004a). About the New York sex offender registry and the Sex Offender Registration Act. Retrieved June 28, 2004, from http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us
12.
Division of Criminal Justice Services. (2004b). Community notification. Retrieved June 28, 2004, from http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us
13.
Division of Criminal Justice Services. (2004c). Sex offender risk level determinations. Retrieved June 28, 2004, from http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us
14.
Doe v. Pataki. (2004). Stipulation of settlement. United States District Court Southern District of New York (96 CIV 1657 (DC)).
15.
Doe v. Pataki. 919 F. Supp. 691 (S.D.N.Y. 1996).
16.
Doe v. Pataki. 427 F. Supp.2d 398 (S.D.N.Y. 2006).
17.
DuweG.DonnayW. (2008). The impact of Megan’s Law on sex offender recidivism: The Minnesota experience. Criminology, 46, 411-446.
18.
EdwardsW.HensleyC. (2001). Contextualizing sex offender management legislation and policy: Evaluating the problem of latent consequences in community notification laws. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45, 83-101.
19.
HansonR. K.BussièreM. T. (1996). Predictors of sexual offender recidivism: A meta-analysis. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Solicitor General of Canada.
20.
HansonR. K.BussièreM. T. (1998). Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sexual offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 348-362.
21.
HansonR. K.Morton-BourgonK. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 1154-1163.
22.
HansonR. K.SteffyR. A.GauthierR. (1993). Long-term recidivism of child molesters. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 646-652.
23.
HarrisA. J. R.HansonR. K. (2004). Sex offender recidivism: A simple question. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Solicitor General of Canada.
24.
Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Act. 42 U.S.C. § 14071 (1994).
25.
KruttschnittC.UggenC.SheltonK. (2000). Predictors of desistance among sex offenders: The interaction of formal and informal social controls. Justice Quarterly, 17, 61-87.
26.
LanganP. A.LevinD. J. (2002). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
27.
LanganP. A.SchmittE. L.DuroseM. R. (2003). Recidivism of sex offenders released from prison in 1994. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
28.
LevensonJ. S.CotterL. P. (2005a). The effects of Megan’s Law on sex offender reintegration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21, 49-66.
29.
LevensonJ. S.CotterL. P. (2005b). The impact of sex offender residence restrictions: 1,000 feet from danger or one step from absurd?International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 49, 168-178.
30.
MarshallW. L.BarbareeH. E. (1988). The long-term evaluation of a behavioral treatment program for child molesters. Behavior Research and Therapy, 6, 499-511.
31.
MatsonS.LiebR. (1996). Community notification in Washington State: 1996 survey of law enforcement. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
32.
MatsonS.LiebR. (1997). Megan’s Law: A review of state and federal legislation. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute of Public Policy.
33.
Megan’s Law. Pub. L. No. 104-145, 110 Stat. 1345 (1996).
34.
Minnesota Department of Corrections. (2003). Level three sex offenders residential placement issues. St. Paul, MN: Author.
35.
MotiukL. L.BrownS. L. (1996). Factors related to recidivism among released federal sex offenders. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Correctional Service of Canada, Research Division.
36.
PetrosinoA. J.PetrosinoC. (1999). The public safety potential of Megan’s Law in Massachusetts: An assessment from a sample of criminal sexual psychopaths. Crime & Delinquency, 45, 140-158.
37.
PrentkyR. A. (1996). Community notification and constructive risk reduction. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11, 295-298.
38.
PrentkyR. A.KnightR. A.LeeA. F. S. (1997). Risk factors associated with recidivism among extrafamilial child molesters. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 141-149.
39.
RandM.CatalanoS. (2007). Criminal victimization, 2006. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
40.
SandlerJ. C.FreemanN. J.SociaM. (2008). Does a watched pot boil: A time-series analysis of New York State’s sex offender registration and notification law. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 14, 284-302.
41.
SchramD. D.MilloyC. D. (1995). Community notification: A study of offender characteristics and recidivism. Olympia, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
42.
TewksburyR. (2005). Collateral consequences of sex offender registration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21, 67-81.
43.
TjadenP.ThoennesN. (1998). Prevalence, incidence, and consequences of violence against women: Findings from the national violence against women survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
44.
WalkerJ. T.MaddanS.VásquezB. E.VanHoutenA. C.Ervin-McCarthyG. (2005). The influence of sex offender registration and notification laws in the United States. Retrieved June 1, 2007, from http://www.acic.org/statistics/Research/SO_Report_Final.pdf
45.
WarrenJ.ReboussinR.HazelwoodR. R.CummingsA.GibbsN.TrumbettaS. (1998). Crime scene and distance correlates of serial rape. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 14, 35-59.
46.
ZevitzR. G. (2006). Sex offender community notification: Its role in recidivism and offender reintegration. Criminal Justice Studies, 19, 193-208.
47.
ZevitzR. G.FarkasM. A. (2000). Sex offender community notification: Assessing the impact in Wisconsin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
48.
ZgobaK. M.LevensonJ. (2008). Variations in the recidivism of treated and nontreated sexual offenders in New Jersey: An examination of three time frames. Victims & Offenders, 3, 10-30.
