Articles Posted in Sex Crimes

After years of criticism and unfair treatment of those convicted of minor sex offenses, the state Senate has approved a bill that will significantly alter the Michigan Sex Offenders Registry.

As a result of the new Michigan sex crimes registry legislation, juvenile offenders will no longer make the public list. Those involved in “Romeo and Juliet” cases – where consenting teens have sex – will not be placed on the list as long as the number of years separating the youths is no more than four years.

Other changes include categorizing the offenders into Tiers, with the most serious on Tier 3. Tier 1 offenders may be able to petition for removal after 10 years for good behavior. The reforms will put Michigan’s registry in compliance with the federal Adam Walsh Act.

The sex crimes registry was originally intended to notify citizens if a child predator lives in the area. However, predators only represent a small slice of the nearly 40,000 names on the list, with some people’s names remaining on the list long after their misdemeanor convictions were expunged by the courts.

Supporters applaud the changes for making Michigan’s sex offender registry less “brutal and stigmatizing” for teenagers, but note that more reforms are necessary to avoid unjust consequences.

As stated in a recent editorial published in the Detroit Free Press, “Getting rid of Romeo and Juliet cases should jump-start a broader debate on how to refine and improve and overreaching requirement that no longer serves its intended purpose.”

Continue reading

The Michigan Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments concerning whether a homeless man who failed to comply with the sex crimes registration requirement can be charged with a violation.

At issue – whether it is a due process violation to prosecute someone for failing to register their residence when they lack a home.

MCL 28.725(1) provides:
An individual required to be registered under this act shall notify the local law enforcement agency or sheriff’s department having jurisdiction where his or her new residence or domicile is located within 10 days after the individual changes or vacates his or her residence, domicile, or place of work or education, including any charge required to be reported under [MCL 28.724(a).]
Here, the prosecution has charged Dowdy with violating this statute by failing to register.

Earlier this year the Court of Appeals for Ingham County held that the fact that a person has no residence by definition makes it impossible for homeless people to report their “domicile or residence.” As such, both the lower court and the appellate court found the charge violated Mr. Dowdy’s constitutional right to due process.

Continue reading

Beginning this week, Michigan State Police will conduct a two week sex offender sweep with the intended purpose of locating sex offenders who have failed to verify their addresses.

Pursuant to the Michigan Sex Offender Registry Act (SORA) individuals convicted of crimes of a sexual nature are forced to register as a sex offender. The type of offense dictates for how long an individual must keep his or her name on the list.

Further, SORA requires individuals to keep this information current, including verifying addresses 4 times a year and updating addresses within ten days of moving. The reporting requirements are too complex for most individuals to understand, and to keep up-to-date on as time passes. Unfortunately though, the penalties are harsh for those who fail to meet all the specific reporting requirements and can result in additional fines and incarceration.

Often because of an oversight or innocent mistake, individuals fail to check-in. “Sweeps” like the one in progress occur to track down offenders and determine why someone has failed to register and often, impose additional penalties.

Continue reading

The U.S. Supreme Court heard testimony on Tuesday in a nightmarish tale underscoring the devastating effect sex crimes allegations can have on individual’s reputation and livelihood. In Los Angeles County v. Humphries, a California couple seeks to recover damages against L.A. County for the failure to remove their names from a list of known or suspected child abusers after they had been found innocent of any crime.

In Humphries, the accuseds’ 15-year-old daughter stole the family car from her father and mother in California and ran away to Utah, to live with her biological mother and stepfather. The teen told her family in Utah she had been sexually abused for months. The police placed the California parents’ names on the Child Abuse Central Index, a sexual offenders registry. After further investigation, no evidence was found and the parents were declared “factually innocent,” cleared of all charges. However, Los Angeles County failed to remove their names, citing a lack of procedure to do so. Even after receiving a court order to destroy the records, the County kept their names on the list.

The Humphrieses subsequently brought charges against the County, alleging due process violations and asserting the right to recover damages.

The federal appeals court determined that the Humphrieses were entitled to damages. CNN reports, however, that the Supreme Court appeared “split,” questioning whether this is a state or local issue, and how to address the constitutional violation.

Apart from the obviously critical legal arguments, this case illustrates the havoc that can result from the combination of false accusations and overzealous law enforcement officials. The Humphrieses’ lives have been turned upside down, they’ve lost job opportunities, income and had their reputations tarnished – despite a determination of innocence, the damage continues.

Continue reading