Is online sex offender list enough? Some parents say no
State considers restricting how close sex offenders can live to schools
9:42 p.m. Sunday, May 18, 2008
KBI Offender search
Visit AccessKansas.org to see if an offender lives in your neighborhood or near your child's school. Another helpful Web site is familywatchdog.org.
The State of Kansas keeps a list of more than 6,000 people it says you should know about.
People like Phillip Trembley are on the state's registered offenders list. He committed a sex crime.
"Did I touch her? Yes," he said.
The KBI's registered offender Web site includes photos, addresses and the types of crimes committed, but is keeping a list enough?
When Trembley looks out his front door he sees Scott Magnet School, less than 300 feet away. Some states restrict where registered offenders can live. Kansas does not.
Web-exclusive extended interview
What is it like to live with the label of "sex offender?" We asked Phillip Trembley. His answer and how he suggests the community should perceive him in this video interview.
When asked if she knew sex offenders in Kansas could live next door to a school Harmony Grubbs said "I did not realize that, no," adding "I think all states should get that law passed. "
But as it stands now, an offender can live anywhere.
Within a half-mile of Scott Magnet there are nine registered offenders, a couple of them are just a few hundred feet away.
Shannon Blankenship was recently picking up her triplets from school when she learned about our investigation into state law or the lack thereof.
She said she was surprised to learn there were two registered sex offenders living within 350 feet of her kids' school and is quiet concerned.
Another parent felt differently.
August Jackson, who was picking up his daughter at school, was not surprised. When told two sex offenders lived within 350 feet of the school, he responded "that's why I'm here" picking up his kids at school.
And no matter how much parents talk to their kids about stranger danger or check with online offender databases, woes exist about people like Trembley. He's been on the list for almost eight years now for aggravated indecent liberties with a child, involving his 6-year-old step-daughter.
He served almost four years in prison and now has to check-in with the sheriff's department three times a year and notify them if he moves, changes jobs or vehicles.
But other states also have residency restrictions. We asked, should Trembley be allowed to live where he does?
"There has been a study done by the Governor's Sex Offender Policy Board -- and I believe that study is ongoing -- related to imposing residency restrictions on sex offenders," KBI officer Erik Wood.
Trembley says there are some people who are habitual offenders, even predators who need to be separated from society or certainly watched closely, but most on the list, he says, are like him.
"I put out a fire once. That does not make me a fireman. I touched a young girl once. It does not make me a threat to society. I erred. I learned my lesson. I paid for my mistake," he said.
Trembley could be eligible to come off the list in a couple of years.
We've put my entire interview with him on our web site, KTKA.com, along with a link to the KBI's Offender Registry and some other sites to help you stay informed about who's living where.
Comments
Note: ktka.com does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor vouch for the factual claims made therein. Nor do we review every post.
May. 18, 2008 at 10:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)mytmouse66 (anonymous)
Where is the link to KBI Offender Registry?
May. 19, 2008 at 12:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)KYHoney (anonymous)
http://www.accesskansas.org/kbi/ro.shtml...
May. 19, 2008 at 7:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)khaines73 (anonymous)
I was surprised to learn that Mirror Inc houses 25 sex offenders. Which it is located near Highland park High School.
May. 19, 2008 at 7:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)mytmouse66 (anonymous)
Thank you KYHoney for the website.
May. 19, 2008 at 7:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)justus1 (anonymous)
One of the comments that should be noted out of this article is the parent that said, "That's why I pick my children up from school". THAT'S a smart parent. They realize that no matter how many "lists" we have or restrictions on where someone can live, NOTHING will guarantee your child's safety other than YOU being the parent YOU should be.
The other notable comment was by the officer who relayed the information that the state is researching the feasibility of residency restrictions, because what they are going to find, if they do their homework is that these restrictions have been shown to have no real affect on children's safety. In other words, they aren't hurting the child, but they aren't HELPING them either. Residency restrictions hurt the offender by making his options for housing extremely limited in most places, and that hurts THEIR children and families. Laws are supposed to be for the good of the people in this country, and do no harm. I firmly believe that eventually these laws will be completely stricken down by the U.S. Supreme Court as unconstitutional because they attack one of our inalienable rights and that is the right to home and hearth AND to be able to enjoy same.
As a parent, I know that I am the only one who can even come close to guaranteeing the safety of my children, and sadly even I can't guarantee that 100%. To honestly believe the government can or will or even WANTS to is ridiculous in my mind. Legislators only care about the safety of your children as far as how many votes it will garner them.
If you're reading this, it means you have the internet. Use your search engine and RESEARCH the subject of sex offenses/offenders for yourself. You will soon realize that the boogeyman the legislators and media has created, is a figment of their hysteria driven agenda.
Finding out that sex offenders are the LEAST likely to re-offend of all those released from prison, NOT the highest, should be enough to whet your appetite to learn more.
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, and other victim's advocacy groups like RAINN.org, over 90% of children who are sexually abused are molested by people they know, love, and trust. You are more likely to find a picture of a child molester in a family reunion photo than on the sex offender registry.
If you want to protect your children from molestation, you're going to have to have the courage to look the area that presents the most danger to them, in the face and deal with it.
May. 19, 2008 at 9:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)shevy61 (anonymous)
justus-
I couldn't agree more. If anyone in Kansas has any doubts about the effectiveness of residency restrictions, just ask the folks over in Iowa, who implemented strict residency restrictions in 2005. Now, everyone from the Iowa Sheriff's Association to the Iowa County Attorney's Association are calling for the repeal of these laws ( http://www.iowa-icaa.com/ICAA%20STATEMEN... ) Among their findings:
~There is no demonstrated protective effect of the residency requirement that justifies the huge draining of scarce law
enforcement resources in the effort to enforce the restriction
~The categories of crimes included in the restriction are too broad, imposing the restriction on many offenders who present no
known risk to children in the covered locations
~Many offenders have families whose lives are unfairly and unnecessarily disrupted by the restriction, causing children
to be pulled out of school and away from friends, and causing spouses to lose jobs and community connections.
Over the last several years, the huge expansion of the type of offenses which are included as "registerable" sex offenses is staggering. The original intent of the public sex offender registry, to identify truly dangerous predators, has been completely obliterated in a mad rush to publicly shame ANYONE convicted of an offense of a sexual nature. There are thousands of people on Kansas' sex offender registry who present no more of a danger to children, or anyone else for that matter, than you do. As a parent, I am outraged that lawmakers have actually made it harder to identify predators by littering the sex offender registry with thousands of people who present no danger to my children. Will residency restrictions make them any safer? Of course not, only a fool could believe that they will. The fact of the matter is that 93% of sexual abuse committed against a child is committed by a family member, or a person already known to the child. The myth of "stranger danger" is based on a handful of well publicized incidents, a tiny fraction of the hundreds of thousands of child sexual abuse cases committed every year. Laws such as residency restrictions and publicly accessible sex offender registries focus attention on the avenue of least likely attack. They makes us, they make politicians, feel good, feel like they have taken positive steps, like they have "done" something, when all they have actually done is allowed the truly dangerous to hide in plain sight amongst the thousands of non-dangerous offenders. Before supporting residency restrictions, I urge you to do the research, look at states that already have these restrictions in place, and see the problems they have caused there, the extra expense they have generated to enforce, and the fact that residency restrictions have not reduced the incidence of sexual abuse against children one iota.
May. 19, 2008 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)sozeee (anonymous)
The idea that a child molester will not walk the extra 1 foot to molest a child is ridiculous. If the boundary around a school is 1,000 feet, then we must assume that the legislature feels that a child molester living 1,001 feet from a school is no longer a threat. As pointed out above, parents must take responsibility for their children's safety. Laws alone cannot do that. Megan's list has become so diluted with "sex offenders" that are not and never were a threat to anyone that the real child molester is lost among the masses. I applaud KS for not following the trend of so many states in putting these restrictions on. It drains law enforcement's time and money and also can have a huge negative impact upon the community and the offender. Homelessness has increased in cities as those on the list cannot find housing. Increasingly they are living on the streets, under bridges and in RVs parked on the side of the road. Homelessness and joblessness can increase the crime rate within any population. I would suggest that if you find a sex offender within your neighborhood that you take the time to ask questions and find out what kind of person this is and whether they pose a threat to you and your family. Chances are the guy next door who stops for happy hour is much more of a threat to your child as he rides his bike in the neighborhood. The sex offender label is being overused and giving the community a false security which will only backfire. Iowa, CA, Ohio, are just a few of the states that are finding out that these laws don't work and are going to cost the state millions to uphold and will ultimately result in court battles as to the constitutionality of these laws. No law can keep your child safe but you as a parent can.
May. 19, 2008 at 11:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)MSLGW (anonymous)
The public registry needs to be abolished and put into the hands of law enforcement only. Law enforcement knows who are the dangerous people are. No registry protects anyone. It is a feel good law that destroys families, creates instability into a group who needs stability the most.
Registries actually endanger society in many ways. How? Well it would take pages to show the articles and reports.
My suggestion is to start here www.cfcoklahoma.com and read. There are other links that will take a person to other sites for more information
May. 19, 2008 at 1:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)Phonic_Fish (anonymous)
Every one has to eat. I would assume this would apply to Sex Offenders, too. To buy food, you have to work. Most jobs have the same hours, or longer, than the daily school session. So, is it not logical that while our kids are in school, most of the people in town, sex offenders included, are off at work somewhere?
But when they come home in the evenings, where are they? Very possibly, living right next to my house which is located about 2 miles away from any school. In fact I KNOW that a sex offender lived within one block of me... another now lives three blocks from me... and a third is about 1/4 mile away.
Now, I've walked down to their houses, and met these guys. Only one made me uneasy. He has since gone back to prison for violating a parole curfew time limit. (He was 20 minutes late coming home from work..... See? He was off working.) The other two seem to be no problem. And... they know I know them.
But the point about the proximity to a school? How silly.
The three schools, miles from my house, always sit dark and empty every night. Thoroughly locked-up and completely safe from a sex offender living within 1,000 feet of that empty structure.
For this kind of brilliant planning, I'm paying some legislator's salary? Give me a break. If you want to do something worthwhile about protecting children, create a "No loitering" zone around the schools during the hour they ARE there. NOT a nonsensical residency restriction that serves no purpose.
May. 19, 2008 at 1:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)fallenone (anonymous)
I would like to point out that Kansas had previously passed a moratorium on sex offender residency retrictions because of serious problems with the laws in Iowa. In 25, Iowa passed 2000 feet restrictions, sending former offenders underground or into homelessness (Monica Davey, “Iowa’s Residency Rules Drive Sex Offenders Underground,” New York Times, March 15, 2006), while the sex crime rates slightly INCREASED from 433 between September 2004 and August 2005 to 445 between September 2005 and August 2006. During that last year, only one sex offense committed against a child was committed by a stranger (Todd Dorman, “Analyst: Data doesn’t support Iowa sex offender rule.” Quad City Times, Feb. 5, 2007).
Nebraska and Kansas, actually prohibited their cities from passing ordinances as restrictive as Iowa’s. Numerous opponents of the law, Iowa County Attorneys Association (I.e., county prosecutors), the Iowa State Sheriffs and Deputies Association, and prevention organizations (such as the Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault), among others, called for a change to the residency restriction law in favor of a less restrictive anti-loitering law.
Iowa tried to undo the damage they caused, but feared political suicide. The media outlet warned of the effects of clustering or “colonizing” sex offenders, or even increasing numbers of those failing to register, but politicians feared changing the law because it is a “political-capital killer.” (DI Editorial Board, “Failure to address residency restrictions a black mark on legislative session.” Daily Iowan, May 1, 2007).
No one has been able to answer the question: Where are sex offenders SUPPOSED to live?
And what the hell does where I sleep at night have ANYTHING to do with my daytime activities?
Dare I mention two Minnesota Studies and a Colorado study found residency laws don't deter crime?
Minnesota Dept. of Corrections, “Level Three Sex Offenders- Treatment Placement Issues, 2003
Minnesota Dept. of Corrections, “Residential Proximity and Sex Offense Recidivism in Minnesota,” April 2007
Report on Safety Issues Raised By Living Arrangements For And Location Of Sex Offenders In The Community (Colorado Dept. of Public Safety, Sex Offender Management Board, March 2004
Please read over this site as well:
http://www.oncefallen.com/ResidenceRestr...
May. 19, 2008 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)MusicBoss (anonymous)
As many have stated here already, these sex laws are doing nothing to protect your children. Nothing. Being good parents and being involved in your child's life, that is better than any registry. Take a few minutes and visit this link below:
http://hrw.org/audio/2007/english/us09/u...
This is an interview with Patty Wetterling whose son Jacob was kidnapped in 1989. Four months after the abduction, his parents, Jerry and Patty Wetterling, formed the Jacob Wetterling Foundation, which is an advocacy group for children's safety. In 1994, the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act, more simply known as the Jacob Wetterling Act, was passed in his honor. A link to the Jacob Wetterling Foundation is listed below:
http://www.jwf.org
Our politicans ignore many of the studies and research in matters involving sex offenders because for many the "get tough of sex offenders" platform always will get them votes. I can't wait for the day when a politican can say "get smart" on sex offender laws. Many of these laws have implications not only on the offender, but their families as well.
May. 19, 2008 at 2:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)Tiredoffear (anonymous)
Here we go again! A community lives calmly, going about their everyday lives, coping with the challenges of raising kids, rising prices, health concerns, you know, all the daily ups and downs of life, but managing to do as well as they can. THEN, out comes the neighborhood Do-Gooder. In this case, the Interviewer. Oh, Mercy me, mom and dad! Did you know you have a SEX OFFENDER in your neighborhood? Right near your child's school? Oh, wring your hands in panic! Proper response!!!
Oh, what will he do? Oh, my poor child! That monster may carry my child off to never-never land and do horrible things to her! OH, I'm terrified! Please, Government, protect my child!!!
Never mind that for the entire time these "monsters" lived right in their same locations, without your awareness, you did NOT live in fear at any time, nor was your child ever harmed.
But, the mission was accomplished. Your new-found fear will disrupt your mind to the point that you will pay any price to make it go away. This fear, that previously didn't invade your daily life until the do-gooder interviewer cried, BOO! Or, until the TV "Experts" with their "opinions" plunged that fear right into your livingrooms. These well-paid fearmongers, using the same tactics as
this interviewer, who did no research into how slight the offenses were among these "monsters", nor how long they had lived there without being a threat to anyone, now have you living in fear and dread.
For as long as I've been alive, I've heard it said, Sex sells! It sure does!
Many people have gotten fabulously wealthy because they know how true this is. But, fear, combined with horrendous sex images sells even better. Did it ever occur to you what price you are paying for the privelege of living in fear? Has your county ever told you what it costs to purchase and maintain the massive data bases, the surveillance, the increased work load of your police departments, parole officers. lawmakers, and other county officials who are necessary to alleviate your fears? States all over this country are throwing their hands up in the air trying to keep up with the millions of dollars it is costing. And folks, the money is NOT there. You will have to give them more...and more...and more. So will the next generation.
From this, there is NO protection for your children.
You have a choice. You can choose to live in fear with a very heavy price tag, or you can do some research and learn the facts and statistics for yourself. www.sosen.us is a great place to start. You;ll soon find others.
Learn the truth and it will set you free from fear.
May. 19, 2008 at 3:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)bee13a (anonymous)
I have a question to KTKA, you state in your story, "Shannon Blankenship was recently picking up her triplets from school when she learned about our investigation into state law or the lack thereof."
Besides scaring your viewers and parents, what "investigation" have you done? Have you investigated what benefits/risks/limitations/COSTS of these requirements are? Have you investigated how other states are struggling with these requirements? EXACTLY WHAT "INVESTIGATION" HAVE YOU BOTHERED TO DO BEFORE PANDERING TO PEOPLE'S BASE FEARS?
May. 26, 2008 at 3:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)geratric1943 (anonymous)
As a father who had two daughter molested by their grandfather I understand the anger that a parent would feel against child molesters, but no list would have protected my daughters; no residency restriction would have either.
The best way to protect your children is to teach them to be aware of when they feel uncomfortable with someone and then to let them know to tell you. Then it is your job to listen to them.
May. 28, 2008 at 1:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)grandmaof13 (anonymous)
As A grandmother of 13 children I have to agree with geratric1943 as well as some of the other posters I don't worry about the ones who live near me it is my job to protect my children as well as my grandchildren, they never play outside unless i am out there with them. I failed in protecting 2 of my gandaughters once from 2 family members MY BROTHER as well as HIS SON. That is not a mistake i will ever do again. The are both now in prison.
So all you people out there worring about the molester down the road forget it, they are just trying to live. they have done there time and only want to work and raise there family just like you and me. leave them alone and they will leave you alone too and just maybe be the best friend you ever had. You really don't know why or what they went in for, it may of been peeing on a building or the guy may of been 18 and boinked his 17 yr old girlfriend. Yes that can happen the way the laws are written. they are both sexual offences. One really never knows why they are on the list.
As someone else said look on your walls and you may see someone you really didn't think would ever hurt a child. I know I did and now i will never trust anyone with my 5 yr old twins i have now, family or not. Since then the pics have been removed.
May. 28, 2008 at 5:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)MSLGW (anonymous)
Fallon Campaign: Sex offender law makes children less safe - Fallon was right!
5/28/2008
Contact: Stacy Brenton
(515) 822-3029
stacy@fallonforcongress.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 28, 2008, (1:30 PM CDT) - Yesterday, The Des Moines Register praised Ed Fallon for his 2002 vote against a bill that prohibited sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of schools or day care centers. The Register said, "… he was frequently on the right side of issues…. He was the only House member to vote against the 2,000-foot residency restriction for certain sex offenders, a law that virtually banished them from many communities, making them harder to track, while driving up costs for law enforcement." http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Ar...
Coincidentally, voters in the Third District received a mailing yesterday asking them "Why does Ed Fallon think it's ok for sex offenders to live near schools?" As a backdrop, it included a photo of a prisoner in an orange jumpsuit looking though a fence at children in a playground. The mailer was sent by Boswell supporter Richard (Red) Brannan of Ankeny and had no return address.
Fallon said, "This is an example of cynical, negative politics. This mailer was sent out only a week before the election to make it look as if I support sex offenders. I call on Congressman Boswell to reject and renounce this misinformation and ask his supporters to cease their efforts to disparage my character and reputation."
Fallon says he voted against the bill because, "I knew that it would only make matters worse." He has been proven right.
Today, prosecutors, sheriffs, police and those who work with victims of sexual abuse agree that the bill was a mistake. The Iowa County Attorneys Association opposes the bill and acknowledges, "The research shows that there is no correlation between residency restrictions and reducing sex offenses against children or improving the safety of children." Scott County prosecutor Bill Davis put it clearly when he said of the law, "It's the wrong path. It doesn't make anyone safe…." Common sense tells you why. The law doesn't keep sex offenders from visiting schools, as the mailer depicts; it doesn't restrict their movements at all.
In fact, most agree it has actually made children less safe. According to the Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault, since the law went into effect, the number of sex offenders that the system has lost track of has more than doubled.
State representative and retired state trooper, Clel Baulder said, "The residency restriction was passed on emotion and emotion has no intelligence."
"I opposed a bill that is now generally agreed to be a mistake - by prosecutors, sheriffs, police, lawmakers who supported it at the time, and those who work with the victims of sexual assault," concluded Fallon.
May. 31, 2008 at 6:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)MSLGW (anonymous)
ex Offender Housing Restrictions
Twenty Findings of Research on Residential Restrictions for Sex Offenders and the Iowa Experience with Similar Policies
http://www.dc.state.ks.us/publications/s...
1. Housing restrictions appear to be based largely on three myths that are repeatedly propagated by the media: 1) all sex offenders reoffend; 2) treatment does not work; and 3) the concept of “stranger danger.” Research does not support these myths, but there is research to suggest that such policies may ultimately be counterproductive. Sex offender residence restrictions. A Report to the Florida Legislature, October 2005, Jill S. Levinson, Ph.D.
Sep. 9, 2008 at 11:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)MSLGW (anonymous)
Who commits most sex crimes? Well, 95% of all new sex crimes are committed by those NOT on the registry. Family members and those known to the family commit 98% of all sex crimes. So much for stranger danger.
2nd question. Who is MORE LIKELY to commit a sex crime upon release from prison? Sex Offenders or NON-sex offenders?
For the answer, go here. www.cfcoklahoma.org and see the article, "Revisiting Department of Justice Recidivism Statistics and More Shocking Truths."
Jun. 24, 2009 at 4:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)Gidit (anonymous)
Good parenting is the best preventive measure of children becoming victims to crime of any nature. News reports have shown that persons in the clergy, school, hospital, immediate family, relatives, men, women, and yes even children have committed these offenses. Rather than get all worked up with rage, get focused and raise your child. Take them to school, don't always trust that they will be alright at the neighbors house or the relatives house. If parents don't conform, but instead continue to push for more and more isolation of the offenders, prepare yourself for a more volatile offender because we are not going to stop the behavior using isolation and extreme punishment. The isolated offender simply gets smarter and more dangerous. I believe that medicinal options are more effective than isolation and prolonged punishment. Neither promotes change which is the only way to stop the behavior. All the more, I personally think that our criminal justice system would not be such a financial burden if we resolved these problems using more wisdom.
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)