View Full Version : An Act of Creating a CT Violent Offender Registry


Jillian
04-11-2007, 03:43 PM
I think this is intresting as it shows you the reasoning they decided to create the bill and what were the other ppl thoughts upon this bill:

Public Safety and Security Committee

JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT

Bill No.:


SB-708

Title:


AN ACT CREATING A VIOLENT OFFENDER REGISTRY.

Vote Date


2/27/2007

Vote Action:


Joint Favorable Change of Reference to Judiciary

PH Date:


1/30/2007

File No.:


SPONSORS OF BILL:

PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY COMMITTEE

REASONS FOR THE BILL:

The bill was prompted by a constituent request for a Violent Offenders Registry similar to the Sexual Offenders Registry in light of the murder of Sierra Giorgi from Waterford, CT. The man had served 14 years in prison for manslaughter.

RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:

Division of Criminal Justice, State of Connecticut. Supports the concept of the bill and suggests coordinating this registry with efforts currently underway in the Judicial Branch and elsewhere to allow for greater public dissemination of criminal record information through other means in order to avoid any duplication of effort.

JAMES PAPILLO, State Victim Advocate, Office of Victim Advocate, State of Connecticut. Supports the bill because it gives the public internet access to information about dangerous offenders living in their communities, information which will let them better prepare for their personal safety as well as the safety of their families. To make the bill effective, the Victim Advocate Office strongly urges that the General Assembly provide the necessary resources to fulfill the requirements of the bill.

NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:

ELIZABETH SUNSHINE, Lyme, CT. The basic premise of Bill SB 708 is that the public has a right to know about ex-convicts living among them who have committed the most egregious offenses against society. A Violent Offender Registry is an appropriate resource that would make already publicly available information more accessible to Connecticut citizens about individuals in the community who may want to seriously harm or kill them.

DAVID SUNSHINE, Lyme, CT.. SB 708 gives residents in Connecticut the ability to protect themselves from individuals who have proven through their past actions their propensity to violent behavior. If Sierra Giorgi had access to information as proposed in this bill, she may have been able to avoid her fate, or at least would have been better able to protect herself.

CATHY GIORGI. Supports the bill because it gives the public a tool to help balance suspicions with legal records. “Sierra knew that there was 'something wrong' with her attacker. She did run him through the sex offender registry. If there had been a violent offender registry, Sierra Giorgi would be alive today!”

C. GARY LOOMIS, Fairfield, CA. Passage of this bill gives the legislature the unique ability to make a decision that will forever impact violent offenders' chances of repeating their horrific acts. Violent offenders should be subjected to the same standards currently applied to sexual offenders.

NANCY PICA, Meriden, CT. SB 708 is a natural extension of the Sexual Offender Registry. The information in the registry should include the offender's name, current address, photograph, the statutory reference for which the individual was convicted, and the status of the offender's compliance with registration. The bill must also include the resources necessary for the Department of Public Safety to create and maintain the registry.

CHRIS McCUTCHEON, Quaker Hill, CT. The Violent Offender Registry is a great first step in helping people help themselves to prevent violence. If Sierra Giorgi had access to a registry of violent offenders, “she could and would have prevented her own violent murder”.

JEAN COVEY, East Lyme, CT. Passage of this bill sends a message to the public that the General Assembly places a high priority on protecting the residents of Connecticut. It is an unfortunate reality that, despite rehabilitation programs, the majority of inmates will not have a significantly positive change in their behavior stemming from their incarceration. Eventually, most violent criminals are released into the general population, making it desperately necessary for the public to have a mechanism to track these dangerous criminals living in their midst.

MORGAN ELY, Lyme, CT. A Violent Offender Registry will give Connecticut residents a useful tool to help them find out about acquaintances that are hiding violent pasts. Sierra Giorgi knew the person who killed her, and believed he could be dangerous, but had no way to find out for sure. SB 708 makes information on violent offenders readily available and gives citizens a tool to protect their families from becoming victims of violent crimes.

ETHAN McCUTCHEON. It has been argued that the Violent Offender Registry provides for the public safety at the expense of the rights of those who have served time. The privacy vs. public safety issue must be weighed against the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics which show that 67.5% of prisoners are rearrested within 3 years and 51.8% are back in prison. Violent criminals are released only to commit the same crimes again. SB 708 gives the citizens of Connecticut the opportunity to protect themselves from this unending cycle of recidivism.

NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:

None expressed.

Reported by: Matthew Gianquinto and Madeline Grabinski


Date: 3/2/2007


An act of creating a violent offender Registry
(www.cga.ct.gov/2007/JFR/S/2007SB-00708-R00PS-JFR.htm)


Link to Proposed Bill 708 (www.cga.ct.gov/2007/TOB/S/2007SB-00708-R00-SB.htm)

mia_101
04-11-2007, 03:46 PM
Oh, no. I don't like the registry we have. I don't want another one!

Jillian
04-11-2007, 03:52 PM
Oh, no. I don't like the registry we have. I don't want another one!

This one is for the state of ct .. Not sure where you are, but i know in texas they arent likely to get a VO Registry.. So far its only 3 states who have them and that is Monatana, Okalahoma and Indiana

chickletone
04-12-2007, 11:00 AM
WVa. is trying to get one passed, and Ms. has already started with the D.N.A. collection of all inmates. That initself makes me believe the VO registry isn't to far behind. As with the SO registry I can foresee alot of problems ahead.Too many cons vs pros in my opinion.No pun intended.

Jillian
04-12-2007, 11:07 AM
I think this registry thing is out of hand, what is next ?

mia_101
04-13-2007, 03:14 PM
Branding.

MurphyGirl
04-18-2007, 06:35 PM
What about DNA taken from VO's! That is happening already in some states... And then there is the futuristic Micro chip implanted in their bodys..... sounds unreal but it could happen!

StormChild
04-19-2007, 04:56 AM
MO collects DNA from all incarcerated and most offenders under supervision. I don't object to this as much as I do to the register because in theory it provides a straight yes/no answer and should limit the chance of wrongful conviction.

I hate the thought of yet another register to be used to victimise people who have already paid their dues and are trying to rebuild their lives.

Jillian
04-19-2007, 12:15 PM
MO collects DNA from all incarcerated and most offenders under supervision. I don't object to this as much as I do to the register because in theory it provides a straight yes/no answer and should limit the chance of wrongful conviction.

I hate the thought of yet another register to be used to victimise people who have already paid their dues and are trying to rebuild their lives.

Yea exactly,my thought! I've seen how the SO Registry and if the VO registry is going to be handled the same way ppl are going to panic day in and day out , and will never go outside again.

As Chickle says they have now doing it already in MS as well.. and as long as it used for its purpose and not used to scare the public it will be ok. Many of these ideas start off being for safety, and of course the media blows it out of proportion

chickletone
04-19-2007, 12:52 PM
Yea exactly,my thought! I've seen how the SO Registry and if the VO registry is going to be handled the same way ppl are going to panic day in and day out , and will never go outside again.

As Chickle says they have now doing it already in MS as well.. and as long as it used for its purpose and not used to scare the public it will be ok. Many of these ideas start off being for safety, and of course the media blows it out of proportion
That's just it,there's already allegations that the samples they're taking have been tainted or contaminated.The people running the labs, taking the samplesw,and entering it into the data base have shown they can't be trusted.Theres been too many cases of false positives or down right lies sending people to prison, even DR.Look at the Duke rape allegations.One of the guys had pictures from security that he wasn't even there at the time of the alleged assault,no D.N.A. to say he was yet he was arrested and headed to trial.What happens to our V.O.'s if they don't have multiple ways to prove they weren't at the scene of the crime.Wouldn't nor would it be the last time evidence was planted or disregarded.

FriscoLady
05-07-2007, 06:39 AM
Well it won't be long for VA either.

I would like to say I won't do it regardless of the consequences, but I like what little freedom I have left out here to much.

They would just list me on the dang thing any way and the first time I failed (refused) to register anything, well: Not going there again!

So, when it happens, I will be there.

Damn!

Patti

mia_101
05-07-2007, 04:46 PM
I don't mind the DNA sampling. It's similar to fingerprinting.

PattiD1157
05-27-2007, 07:05 PM
If everything is done on the up and up there should be no problem, BUT....we all know how things go. Many wouldn't be here on PTO if everything was done on the up and up. I guess we just wait and hope for the best and should something like this go into effect pray like crazy that those entering information are honest people with a brain.

1Citizen
06-06-2007, 02:19 AM
If we've become a society that feels compelled to "register" people, why stop at just those convicted of a sex offense or violent crime, why not any crime? A registry of people who associate with, or have a relationship with an offender may be of value, and a registry of those who have ever been accused of a crime would probably be a good idea too. After all they may be predisposed to additional accusations in the future, and accusations are part of the public record, right?
As the lists of what's considered "violent crime" continues to evolve and expand, a registry of violent offenders should be an impressive database indeed. After all, we incarcerate more people per capita than any other civilized nation, don't we?
A real solution to crime and accountability would be the implanted GPS chip for everyone in our country – even visitors. With the right computer program, who was where when what happened would be easy enough to determine. With such oversight there may be some potential for abuse, but to insure our sense of safety, I’m confident our society would come to embrace the concept. Of course some people will resist, but they’re probably the ones who are likely to commit a crime anyway.
There…problem solved – a perfect, crime-free world!

MurphyGirl
06-08-2007, 06:44 PM
If we've become a society that feels compelled to "register" people, why stop at just those convicted of a sex offense or violent crime, why not any crime? A registry of people who associate with, or have a relationship with an offender may be of value, and a registry of those who have ever been accused of a crime would probably be a good idea too. After all they may be predisposed to additional accusations in the future, and accusations are part of the public record, right?
As the lists of what's considered "violent crime" continues to evolve and expand, a registry of violent offenders should be an impressive database indeed. After all, we incarcerate more people per capita than any other civilized nation, don't we?
A real solution to crime and accountability would be the implanted GPS chip for everyone in our country – even visitors. With the right computer program, who was where when what happened would be easy enough to determine. With such oversight there may be some potential for abuse, but to insure our sense of safety, I’m confident our society would come to embrace the concept. Of course some people will resist, but they’re probably the ones who are likely to commit a crime anyway.
There…problem solved – a perfect, crime-free world!

Or better yet we can install chips into our brains that would alert the authorities to unlawful thoughts!

LMAO!

Ann

june5
06-08-2007, 07:23 PM
1Citizen--I agree...it started with just sex offenders and alot of people said 'oh good.' Then the precedent was set...now we have violent offender registries popping up...what's to stop a general felony registry? Not a damn thing. That's the problem.

Taltash
06-13-2007, 07:57 PM
Hah, ever seen the move Minority Report? It's a good film. Basically, it's set in the future, with a police department using psychics to predict murders. They then arrest the murderers BEFORE the murder occurs and incarcerate them. Of course, this system backfires in the movie, but I wouldn't put it past the government to attempt something like this.

As for the registry - I say let them do it, and then some, and here's why -

The more types of convicts they make a registry for, the more likely they are to combine them, which would create a HUGE registry that no one would probably ever sift through, given it's size. But, starting with a VO registry in addition to an SO registry.....pretty soon people will be demanding residency requirements for VO's as well.....and this is a good thing. But don't get upset with me until I finish explaining WHY it's a good thing.

So, the residency and registry requirements are passed for VO's. This has now blossomed into a highly bureaucratic, obscenely expensive venture. Police will have to monitor more people. More people will have to be checked on to make sure they meet residency requirements, registry requirements, etc. More policemen and police resources will need to be devoted to such a thing, leading to an increase in TAXES. If taxes do not compensate for the increased cost, then the police will be stretched thin, and crimes more likely to occur.

So, now of course, people will want EVERY felon on a registry (because they want to know who else to watch out for), and the BS grows. More felons with registry requirements and residency requirements, and not enough money or manpower to monitor them all. At that point, the system WILL collapse in on itself, and people will realize the registries and the residency requirements helped them not one darn bit.

In addition to all that, the more people that are on the registry, the more likely someone knows someone on the registry. And many people will be surprised to know that Joe Schmoe down the street committed armed robbery at the age of 19 to support his drug habit. But, the Joe Schmoe they know is a rehabilitated, kind citizen who helps them carry the groceries in or whatever. When they realize that "felon" doesn't equal "evil", many people will start to view other felons in the same light - i.e., as people, not monsters.

So yes, as strange as it may seem, the creation of a registry for ALL convicts will actually help be the end of the registry period. It will be too big, too expensive, and people will either walk away with a different impression of felons because they know someone on it, or become desensitized to the drama of it all because there are so many people on it. Either way, the registry ends up becoming a thing of the past.

1Citizen
06-14-2007, 04:50 AM
Hah, ever seen the move Minority Report? It's a good film. Basically, it's set in the future, with a police department using psychics to predict murders. They then arrest the murderers BEFORE the murder occurs and incarcerate them. Of course, this system backfires in the movie, but I wouldn't put it past the government to attempt something like this.

As for the registry - I say let them do it, and then some, and here's why -

The more types of convicts they make a registry for, the more likely they are to combine them, which would create a HUGE registry that no one would probably ever sift through, given it's size. But, starting with a VO registry in addition to an SO registry.....pretty soon people will be demanding residency requirements for VO's as well.....and this is a good thing. But don't get upset with me until I finish explaining WHY it's a good thing.

So, the residency and registry requirements are passed for VO's. This has now blossomed into a highly bureaucratic, obscenely expensive venture. Police will have to monitor more people. More people will have to be checked on to make sure they meet residency requirements, registry requirements, etc. More policemen and police resources will need to be devoted to such a thing, leading to an increase in TAXES. If taxes do not compensate for the increased cost, then the police will be stretched thin, and crimes more likely to occur.

So, now of course, people will want EVERY felon on a registry (because they want to know who else to watch out for), and the BS grows. More felons with registry requirements and residency requirements, and not enough money or manpower to monitor them all. At that point, the system WILL collapse in on itself, and people will realize the registries and the residency requirements helped them not one darn bit.

In addition to all that, the more people that are on the registry, the more likely someone knows someone on the registry. And many people will be surprised to know that Joe Schmoe down the street committed armed robbery at the age of 19 to support his drug habit. But, the Joe Schmoe they know is a rehabilitated, kind citizen who helps them carry the groceries in or whatever. When they realize that "felon" doesn't equal "evil", many people will start to view other felons in the same light - i.e., as people, not monsters.

So yes, as strange as it may seem, the creation of a registry for ALL convicts will actually help be the end of the registry period. It will be too big, too expensive, and people will either walk away with a different impression of felons because they know someone on it, or become desensitized to the drama of it all because there are so many people on it. Either way, the registry ends up becoming a thing of the past.
I like where this is going, Taltash, but I would expect a different outcome from the "registry frenzy" than you describe. True, it would take major tax increases and new fees (hidden tax) to fund the bloated budgets of the bureaucrats lucky enough to have this job, but I believe society could be placated by the “peace of mind” of knowing that they are being protected from yet another heinous threat.

The government will find a way to fund such a win/win scenario for themselves. If you look at the enormous costs to society from the “war on drugs,” yet it hasn’t collapsed upon itself and the government has made lots of money from this war. They would probably make everyone on the registries and in the databases pay a monthly fee, say a hundred bucks or just take a percentage of the offender’s pay – now we’re talking – the big bucks! Who could oppose such a noble endeavor?

In our digital world, once the data base is created, “you’re in for life.” Such digital information always seems end-up being used for darker purposes than it was originally created for. Discrimination by any other name.

In the country I live in, once an individual serves his sentence, he’s paid his debt to society and is encouraged to assimilate and become a productive member of society. Oh! Wait a minute. How many years ago was that?

Oh yeah, I did see Minority Report. I could tell it was set in the future because psychics predicted the crime, whereas now we have to depend upon the AUSA and the various laws that equate “a crime” with “the possibility of a crime.”

Jillian
06-20-2007, 03:44 PM
I like where this is going, Taltash, but I would expect a different outcome from the "registry frenzy" than you describe. True, it would take major tax increases and new fees (hidden tax) to fund the bloated budgets of the bureaucrats lucky enough to have this job, but I believe society could be placated by the “peace of mind” of knowing that they are being protected from yet another heinous threat.

The government will find a way to fund such a win/win scenario for themselves. If you look at the enormous costs to society from the “war on drugs,” yet it hasn’t collapsed upon itself and the government has made lots of money from this war. They would probably make everyone on the registries and in the databases pay a monthly fee, say a hundred bucks or just take a percentage of the offender’s pay – now we’re talking – the big bucks! Who could oppose such a noble endeavor?

In our digital world, once the data base is created, “you’re in for life.” Such digital information always seems end-up being used for darker purposes than it was originally created for. Discrimination by any other name.

In the country I live in, once an individual serves his sentence, he’s paid his debt to society and is encouraged to assimilate and become a productive member of society. Oh! Wait a minute. How many years ago was that?

Oh yeah, I did see Minority Report. I could tell it was set in the future because psychics predicted the crime, whereas now we have to depend upon the AUSA and the various laws that equate “a crime” with “the possibility of a crime.”

I agree with you both. 1citizen you are right the govt basically uses that fear that many have instilled in them about crime, or something bad happening in order to increase the public need and want for these registries. They feel as though if they have them all on file nothing will happen. But as it has been shown wiht the registries now its not 100 percent full proof. All the information is not always correct or there. Registries cause mass hysteria and the media just hypes it up even more.

I wish that when they did do their time that it would be as debt served and they can come out to be a productive member of society but of course we know that is not going to happen.

I love how this thread is going and the thoughts that are coming out.. this is a great discussion

justus1
06-25-2007, 12:10 AM
If everything is done on the up and up there should be no problem, BUT....we all know how things go. Many wouldn't be here on PTO if everything was done on the up and up. I guess we just wait and hope for the best and should something like this go into effect pray like crazy that those entering information are honest people with a brain.


Honestly, I think that's the whole problem in a nutshell. Sex Offenders "waiting to see" and "hoping for the best" and "thinking that the bru-ha-ha would quiet down and the dust would settle, and the american public would get their brains put back in their heads", instead of standing up and screaming "Hell NO". First they came for our loved ones, now they are starting to come after yours....who is next on the list? Because it's not going to stop, not unless we do something to make it stop.

I knew this was coming, sometimes it just plain sucks being right. In this situation, I would much rather have been wrong.

1Citizen
06-25-2007, 01:56 AM
If someone presents an effective way to, "do something to make it stop" as justus1 rightly points-out - count me in. Am I alone in thinking that civil rights and/or anti-discrimination laws may be a way to challenge some of the consequences of this misguided trend in our society? What if it could be shown that the majority of those listed in a registry were from a protected class or minority race. Would it be seen as defacto discrimination?

I'm not up on the subject, but I'd like to hear of some challenges to the creation of these databases.