Do Released Sexual Offenders have the Right to be left alone?
...n”, whom he mistakenly sees as a material possession. Most sexual assaults (60%) occur in a private home and (38%) occur in the victim’s home. Adolescence is usually the age when sexual assaults are committed. Therefore once these sex offenders are released, they will mature from their past actions. Since most of these offences are a result of anger and depression, communities should develop a multidisciplinary team made up of social service agencies, hospitals and individual citizens to handle incidents of sexual crimes. When keeping a close eye at sexual criminals, it distracts the victims and their families from offenders they don’t know. It also prevents them from providing the aid that could turn a twisted individual into someone with self-respect that eventually leads to respect for others. Rapists and pedophiles who show no willingness to change their behavior are deemed sexual predators and a danger to the community. Laws that would restrict certain freedoms from sex offenders just being released are unconstitutional. Imposing exceptional penalties on sexual offenders violate the requirement that all people be treated “equally under the law” . Sex offenders generally have lower IQ’s and so they are often influenced to commit such horrible acts from the media that include violent television programming, movies or could be a result of experiences within their past resulting in a long-term psychological damage. Therefore the focus of attention should be on the media and the way children are being disciplined. After all, some past abusers may be good persons as well and so in knowing this, we cannot distinguish who will and will not sexually assault someone in the future. If the government decides to keep a close eye on sex offenders, it simply draws attention away from other potential offenders present in our community. Another article in the Toronto Star December of 1996 discusses the issue of having sex offender alerts. It brings about the fact that police would be able to warn residents when a dangerous offender is released into their community under a legislation to be introduced by the provincial government. This decision was a very significant impact in terms of community safety. This new bill introduced an amendment with three existing pieces of legislation. Firstly, the Police Services Act now gives chiefs the power to disclose personal information on offenders such as pedophiles and rapists when they are released back into a community. Second, the Ministry of Correctional Services Act gives correctional officials the power to disclose the same type of information about soon-to-be-released offenders to victims, agencies responsible for children, vulnerable adults and the general public. And finally, the Change of Name Act now updates the justice records of people to reflect their criminal records even when they legally change their names. After examining the three pieces of legislation, it is clear that the above amendments are more than adequate in preventing future offences. In a way, offenders aren’t being protected or left alone because their privacy and dignity is being affected severely. The proposed new bill was meeting a recommendation of the 1993 inquest into the murder of Christopher Stephenson, an 11 year-old Brampton boy killed in 1988 by repeat child rapist Joseph Fredericks. Christopher was brutally murdered after being raped, tortured then killed after being hung on a tree and being stabbed 3 times. Christopher’s father, Jim Stephenson hailed the bill as a valuable step toward protecting children from dangerous sexual offenders like Fredericks. This next article was taken from the Toronto Star; October 6, 1999 that discusses “Christopher’s Law” . Sex offenders living in Ontario charged with any sex-related offence, including child pornography, whether released on parole, probation, absolute or conditional discharge and even those who have completed their sentences will have to register with police within 15 days of getting out of prison if proposed provincial legislation is passed. This law was named after Christopher Stephenson where anyone convicted of a dangerous sexual offence in Canada would have to be listed on the Sex Offender Registry . According to the bill, serious sex offenders may have to report to police for the rest of their lives. As more and more factors build up in preventing offenders in committing the same acts in the future, more and more rights and freedoms are drawn away from them. If serious sex offenders are to be treated so harshly throughout the rest of their lives, the government might as well inflict a life-term jail sentence to ensure that the streets are safe. The Canadian Bar Association’s National Criminal Justice Section opposing the main proposals contained in Bill C-55 prepared this next article. They feel that these changes are unnecessary and raise substantial concerns about “fairness”, constitutionality and efficacy. The four areas of concern are firstly, that the Bill removes judicial discretion to impose a fixed sentence on prisoners declared to be dangerous offenders. Second, it repeals the requirement for separate psychiatric assessment by the Crown and defense. Third, it allows re-sentencing by permitting a dangerous offender application up to six months after the original imposition of sentence and lastly, it postpones the first review for parole eligibility from three to seven years. All of these factors are in violation to an offender’s individual rights. There must be a certain boundary to how far you can limit an offender when being released. Another case that has been studied deals...