CRIME : Sex-Offender Notification Laws Facing Legal Hurdles

WASHINGTON —  Megan Kanka’s family had no idea that danger lurked just across the street last summer when a neighbor in Hamilton Township, N.J., lured the 7-year-old into his home and raped and strangled her. They did not know the man was an ex-convict who had served time for sexual offenses.

The crime drew a fierce reaction from a public outraged that someone with a background of sex crimes could live among them secretly. The New Jersey Legislature responded in October by approving a tough, controversial statute requiring convicted sex offenders to register with police after their release from prison. Known as “Megan’s Law,” the statute also says the community must be advised of a convicted offender’s whereabouts.

Now, encouraged by congressional action and prodded by the Justice Department, more states are adopting similar provisions. California, Connecticut and New York have all passed statutes, raising the total to 44 states.

However, the constitutionality of the statute has been called into question by several judges and by the American Civil Liberties Union, which has objected that community notification provisions encourage violence against freed offenders.

The New Jersey Supreme Court recently upheld the legality of the state’s statute, which also directs local authorities to notify the community where a released sex offender settles. A federal judge has ruled the law unconstitutional; that ruling is still under appeal.

“This is about peace of mind,” says Bonnie Campbell, director of the Justice Department’s newly created Office of Violence Against Women. “People need to have the assurance that local police know when child molesters and sex offenders are released.”

Campbell, a former Iowa attorney general who led an effort to enact a sex offender registry in her state, believes such laws do not violate constitutional freedoms and are “a reasonable method” of protecting public safety.

According to Campbell, studies have shown that sex offenders “are significantly more likely than other repeat offenders to commit other sex crimes or other violent crimes.” One Justice Department survey, for example, found that rapists were 10 1/2 times more likely to be rearrested than were other released criminals.

Congress sought last fall to encourage states to enact sex-offender registration laws by approving the Jacob Wetterling Act, named after an 11-year-old boy who was abducted six years ago by an unknown gunman and has never been found.

Unlike Megan’s Law, the Wetterling Act does not require notification of communities--only that state and local law enforcement be alerted.

A week ago, Rep. Dick Zimmer (R-N.J.) announced that he is introducing a bill to try to extend Megan’s Law to all 50 states.

“This is the logical next step in the federal legislation in light of [the recent] ruling by the New Jersey Supreme Court,” Zimmer said.

Opponents of special sex-offender statutes object to giving communities notification, arguing that such provisions encourage harassment or violence against offenders who already have been punished by serving time.

In Phillipsburg, N.J., for example, two men forced their way into a home last January looking for a paroled sex offender who, according to police, was living in their community. The intruders announced they were looking for “the child molester” and began beating the wrong man. Police arrived to break up the fray.

In Washington state, arson, death threats, slashed tires and loss of employment have been attributed to a similar community notification law.

Says Edward Martone, executive director of the New Jersey Civil Liberties Union: “Besides creating a climate of ugly vigilantism, community notification laws cause compulsive sex offenders to run from family, avoid treatment and seek the safety of anonymity by hiding out, thus subjecting the public to even greater risk.”

Californians who want to learn if a neighbor is a convicted sex offender must call a special phone line set up by the state Department of Justice and identify themselves, state their concerns and give the name of the particular person they are inquiring about. The California law has yet to be tested in court.