Reassessing Residency Restrictions: Analyzing Crime Proximity and Patterns for Sex Offenders in South Korea

Abstract

This study critically examines the effectiveness of residency restrictions for sex offenders in South Korea by analyzing crime proximity and patterns. Using data from the 2015 Korean Ministry of Justice report, the study examines sex offenders under electronic monitoring from 2012 to 2014. The results show that crimes involving child victims occurred closer to offenders’ residences than those involving adult victims, partially supporting the rationale behind residency restrictions. However, the proximity of crimes against unfamiliar victims raises questions about the overall effectiveness of these policies Regression analysis showed that prior offenses and IQ predicted crime distance, but alcohol use and psychopathy did not. The study concludes that residency restrictions offer limited protection and recommends a comprehensive approach, including monitoring and support programs, to reduce recidivism and improve community safety. Policymakers should consider additional measures beyond physical distance constraints to mitigate risks posed by sex offenders.

Keywords

social scientific evidence residency restriction policies sexual offenders community safety recidivism

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ahn

J. K.

(2024). Utilization of psychological assessment tools in evaluating recidivism risk for sexual offenses (2020~2023) with a focus on PCL-R and KSORSAS. Korean Journal Of Criminology, 36(3), 131–158.

Ahn

J. K.

Yoon

Choi

Y. M

. (2023). Victim selection in Korean sexual crimes: A latent class analysis. Psychology, Crime & Law, 1–20. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2023.2228969

Beauregard

Leclerc

(2007). An application of the rational choice approach to the offending process of sex offenders: A closer look at the decision-making. Sexual Abuse, 19(2), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/107906320701900204

Beauregard

Rossmo

D. K.

Proulx

(2007). A descriptive model of the hunting process of serial sex offenders: A rational choice perspective. Journal of Family Violence, 22(6), 449–463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-007-9101-3

Brantingham

P. L.

Brantingham

P. J.

(1981). Notes on the geometry of crime. in Brantingham

P. J.

Brantingham

P. L.

eds., Environmental criminology (pp. 27–54). Sage Publications.

Brantingham

P. J.

Brantingham

P. L.

Andresen

M. A.

(2017). The geometry of crime and crime pattern theory. in Wortley

Townsley

, eds., Environmental criminology and crime analysis (pp. 98–115). Routledge.

Brantingham

P. L.

Brantingham

P. J.

(1993). Nodes, paths and edges: Considerations on the complexity of crime and the physical environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13(1), 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80212-9

California Sex Offender Management Board. (2008). Homelessness among registered sex offender in California: The numbers, the risks, and the response. Sacramento, CA.

Chajewski

Mercado

C. C.

(2009). An evaluation of sex offender residency restriction functioning in town, county, and city-wide jurisdictions. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 20(1), 44–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403408320845

10.

Cho

Yoon-Oh

. (2015). A Study on the Evaluation of Sex Offender Registration and Notification in the US. Korean Journal of Correctional Discourse, 9(1), 101–124.

11.

Cohen

L. E.

Felson

(1979). Social change and crime rate trends a routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588–608.

12.

Colorado Department of Public Safety. (2004). Report on safety issues raised by living arrangements for and location of sex offenders in the community. U.S Department of Justice.

13.

Constitutional Research Institute. (2023). Constitutional Review of Residency Restrictions for High-Risk Sex Offenders. Constitutional Court of Korea.

14.

Duwe

Donnay

Tewksbury

(2008). Does residential proximity matter? A geographic analysis of sex offense recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 484–504.

15.

Hare

R. D.

(2003). The Hare psychopathy checklist-revised (2nd ed.). Multi-Health Systems.

16.

Jang

Y. M

Tak

H. S.

(1992). A study on recidivism. Korean Institute of Criminology and Justice.

17.

Kang

(2022). Korean institute of criminology and legal policy (vol. 3). Published on May 27, 2022.

18.

Levenson

J. S.

(2008). Collateral consequences of sex offender residence restrictions. Criminal Justice Studies, 21, 153–166.

19.

Levenson

J. S.

Cotter

L. P.

(2005). 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.

20.

Levenson

J. S.

Hern

(2007). Sex offender residence restrictions: Unintended consequences and community re-entry. Justice Research and Policy, 9, 59–73.

21.

Mancini

Shields

R. T.

Mears

D. P.

Beaver

K. M.

(2010). Sex offender residence restriction laws: Parental perceptions and public policy. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(5), 1022–1030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.07.004

22.

Mercado

C. C.

Alvarez

Levenson

J. S.

(2008). The impact of specialized sex offender legislation on community re-entry. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research & Treatment, 20, 188–205.

23.

Meredith

Speir

Johnson

(2007). Developing and implementing automated risk assessments in parole. Justice Research and Policy, 9(1), 1–21.

24.

Merriam

D. H.

(2008). Residency restrictions for sex offenders: A failure of public policy. Planning & Environmental Law, 60(10), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/15480750802467677

25.

Minnesota Department of Corrections. (2003). Adult offender pre-release workbook. U.S. Department of Justice.

26.

Nobles

M. R.

Levenson

J. S.

Youstin

T. J.

(2012). Effectiveness of residence restrictions in preventing sex offense recidivism. Crime & Delinquency, 58(4), 491–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128712449230

27.

Pedneault

Beauregard

Harris

D. A.

Knight

R. A.

(2015). Rationally irrational: The case of sexual burglary. Sexual Abuse, 27(4), 376–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063213511669

28.

Red-Bird

(2009). Assessing housing availability under Ohio’s sex offender residency restrictions. Ohio State University Press.

29.

Schulenberg

J. L.

(2007). Predicting noncompliant behavior: Disparities in the social locations of male and female probationers. Justice Research and Policy, 9(1), 25–57.

30.

Snow

Kikuch

Kissner

(2015). A multilevel analysis of registered sex offender violation status: The role of neighborhood disadvantage and social services. International Journal of Criminology and Sociology, 4, 1–15.

31.

Tewksbury

Mustaine

E. E.

(2009). Stress and collateral consequences for registered sex offenders. Journal of Public Management & Social Policy, 15, 215–239.

32.

Williams

F. P.

McShane

M. D.

Dolny

M. H.

(2000). Predicting parole absconders. The Prison Journal, 80, 24–38.

33.

Willis

G. M.

Grace

R. C.

(2008). The quality of community reintegration planning for child molesters: Effects on sexual recidivism. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 20, 218–240.

34.

Woods

Porter

(2008). Examining the relationship between sexual offenders and their victims: Interpersonal differences between stranger and non-stranger sexual offences. The Journal of Sexual Aggression, 14(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600802056640

35.

Yoon

J. S.

Jang

J. H.

H. N.

Park

H. R.

Kim

E. G.

(2023). Research on residency restriction policies for high-risk sex offenders. Korean Institute of Criminology and Justice.

36.

Zandbergen

P. A.

Levenson

J. S.

Hart

T. C.

(2010). Residential proximity to schools and daycares: An empirical analysis of sex offense recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(5), 482–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854810363549