Two days ago, the Union-Recorder in Georgia published a bizarre editorial. The editorial board noted that the state’s sex offender registry system drives people into homelessness and deprived them of counseling and employment opportunities, but laments this fact only insofar as it allows registrants to “fly under the radar” and makes them “more difficult to track.” Georgia’s registry system, according to the authors, “places too much trust in the honor system” because requiring people to self-register “places too much confidence” in the registrant. They acknowledge that there are “strong penalties” for failing to register, including life in prison, but these apparently don’t go far enough, as some people with convictions could “choose to live on the fringes of the law.”

“As a society we have determined that in the case of convicted sexual offenders, the potential danger to the general public, and especially children, outweighs their rights to resume a normal life after the debt to society is paid,” the editorial board writes, but “despite all the concerns we have about civil liberties and individual rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, we simply have to know where these offenders are and what threat they pose to a community.” The authors propose no solutions. And, more to the point, they betray a fundamental ignorance of the fact that no empirical evidence shows that registries actually protect anyone. Some evidence indicates they make us less safe.

Sex offender registries weren’t designed to punish people, Dara Lind wrote for Vox in 2016. “The registry was designed for ‘sexual predators’ who repeatedly preyed on children (at least according to the fears of 1990s policymakers). The purpose was supposed to be not punishment but prevention. The theory: ‘Sexual predators’ were unable or unwilling to control their urges, and the government could not do enough to keep them away from children, so the job of avoiding ‘sexual predators’ needed to fall to parents.” But now, 20 years later, “the focus on sex crimes has shifted from sexual abuse of children to sexual assault and rape. The idea that criminals can’t control their behavior has been replaced by attention to the cultural and institutional failures that allow rapes to happen and go unpunished.” As a preventive tool, it hasn’t worked, Lind writes. “Instead, it’s caught up thousands of people in a tightly woven net of legal sanctions and social stigma. Registered sex offenders are constrained by where, with whom, and how they can live—then further constrained by harassment or shunning from neighbors and prejudice from employers.”

Despite ongoing stigma against those convicted of sex offenses, there has been some movement away from ever-restrictive sex registries and toward more productive solutions. The political pressure to oppose these efforts, however, is strong.

Recently, the governor of Wisconsin, Tony Evers, vetoed a bipartisan bill that would have lifted state restrictions on how close to schools people convicted of sex crimes can live. The bill, which passed the state Assembly and Senate unanimously, would have repealed a state law that bars certain people from living less than 1,500 feet from schools, public parks, places of worship, or youth centers. The bill would also have required people be placed in their home county after being released. In his veto message, Evers said the change would have compromised children’s safety. “In testimony before lawmakers earlier this year, the State Public Defender’s Office said out-of-county placements often happen because counties can’t find a place to house offenders that meet the 1,500-foot requirement,” reports Wisconsin Public Radio. Senator Dan Feyen, a Republican and one of the bill’s sponsors, said he agreed the distance is challenging for some and, in his opinion, arbitrary. “It’s just a number that’s made up.”

In Pennsylvania, the state Supreme Court will soon rule on the constitutionality of that state’s sex offender registry law. The latest iteration of the law, which took effect at the end of 2012, increased the “list of offenses subject to registration and notification—including a handful that are not sexual in nature—and imposing more stringent registration and notification rules,” reports the Philadelphia Inquirer. The registry more than doubled. One of the cases before the high court deals with requirements under the current law for people classified as “sexually-violent predators,” those who have committed the most serious offenses and who are considered to have a high likelihood to reoffend. The question is whether lifetime registration, as well as lifetime counseling and community notification, constitute unlawful punishment.

In another case at issue, lawyers for a biochemical engineer with no prior record who was convicted of aggravated indecent assault and subject to lifetime registration are arguing that the law violates a fundamental right to reputation under the state Constitution. They posit that the law presumes that people convicted of certain sexual offenses cannot change and therefore are prone to reoffending. The lawyers “cite experts and studies that show the public holds a false perception that people convicted of sexual offenses will go on to reoffend, and that their risk for doing so lasts for years,” according to the Inquirer. “They said only a small number of offenders fit that bill, while the rest get lumped into that group, suffering a lifetime of harm. Their arguments go to the heart of the criminal justice reform movement blossoming across the country that aims to reduce harsh penalties for smaller offenses, and reform policies for offenders who, after serving prison time, suffer myriad social and financial hardships.”

Given the growing understanding of just how problematic these registries are, it is perhaps most remarkable that Nigeria is adopting a U.S.-style sex offense registry. “Campaigners have hailed the launch of Nigeria’s first sex offender register as a vital step towards tackling reported cases of sexual abuse, which are rising across the country,” reports The Guardian, in an article that notably lacks comments from critics. “The publicly accessible online register of people prosecuted for sexual violence since 2015 will allow public bodies and police authorities to conduct background checks and identify repeat offenders.”

Sexual violence indeed seems to be a serious problem in Nigeria, which stigmatizes those who come forward to report abuse. Despite the dearth of statistics, Unicef estimates that 1 in 4 girls in the country have experienced sexual violence by the age of 18 and few receive support. In Lagos, the most frequently assaulted group are children, many of whom are abused by relatives or family friends. Those who do come forward can be treated badly by authorities, according to the Guardian article. “We have cases where victims are being questioned in front of the perpetrators or in open spaces and criticized by officers for not remembering details like the road where the rape occurred,” said Oluwaseun Osowobi, the director of a Nigerian non-government organization that supports survivors of sexual violence. “Cases of sexual abuse are not prosecuted for flimsy reasons,” Osowobi added. “How police collect data is unprofessional and archaic. Police regularly misplace case-files or evidence. Eventually victims become exhausted by the system and give up.”

There is no doubt that this is all problematic and merits urgent attention. But the question is why a system that has already failed in the U.S. should be expected to succeed in Nigeria. Since few people are reported and fewer are convicted, it seems unlikely that anyone will be deterred by the idea that they now “have nowhere to hide,” as Osowobi put it. Beatrice Jedy-Agba, the executive secretary of Nigeria’s Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons, said: “It enables bodies such as schools [and] hospitals to conduct background checks and it will deter sex offenders because they will know their names will be published, affecting their employment and role in society.” Until the culture that tolerates sex abuse and stigmatizes victims is inverted, however, it is hard to imagine that anyone will be so deterred. Nigeria and the U.S. would do better to be guided by evidence.

Georgia’s sex offender registry is not perfect.

However, it is necessary.

State laws have made it illegal for child sex offenders to live or work in locations where parents should have the expectation their children are safe, including playgrounds, churches or schools.

In 2012, the Georgia General Assembly passed legislation requiring sex offenders be categorized based on the potential danger they pose to the general public. Sex offenders are separated by risk levels that distinguish between a person who has been convicted of rape and a teenager who may have had consensual sex with another underage teenager, for instance.

Delineating between types of offenses was the right thing to do.

However, balancing individual liberties of people who have been convicted of a crime, but served out their sentences, while keeping the public safe will always be a challenge.

The biggest problem with the sex offender registry is not that it provides identifying information about offenders.

Breaking the law has its consequences.

As a society we have determined that in the case of convicted sexual offenders, the potential danger to the general public, and especially children, out weighs their rights to resume a normal life after the debt to society is paid.

While we value civil liberties, keeping our children safe is an even more important value.

Restricting where a convicted offender can live and work is no longer about punishment. It is about keeping others safe.

The first problem with the registry is it places too much trust in the honor system.

Requiring an offender to self-register places too much confidence in the offender.

Yes, there are strong penalties for not registering, that oddly can be more severe than the penalties for the actual crime that was committed, but when people choose to live on the fringes of the law, or are simply bent on lawlessness, they are often not concerned about consequences.

We commend the Lowndes County Sheriff’s Office for going beyond basic requirements. Still, for an offender who has not been put into the system and is flying under the radar, there is no means of verification.

The next problem with the registry is there is no fail-safe system to guarantee to a community that all sex offenders living there are actually on the registry.

The most serious loophole pertains to the homeless.

No one knows exactly how many homeless sex offenders live in Georgia or in a given community.

A sex offender has 72 hours after conviction or a change of address to notify the sheriff’s department. If they don’t register they could face prison time, simply for not registering. Subsequent failures to register could mean life in prison.

It is an irony, but restrictions against where sex offenders can live and the requirement for them to be placed on a registry have driven many of them to homelessness. 

It’s a grim Catch 22 that the laws designed to keep track of sex offenders have made it extremely difficult to find a a place to live, causing them to be homeless and making them more difficult to track. Or cause some offenders to go into hiding.

Restricting the lives of sex offenders may actually compromise their ability to find housing, employment, maintain counseling, treatment and rehabilitation.

Still, despite all the concerns we have about civil liberties and individual rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, we simply have to know where these offenders are and what threat they pose to a community.

As a society we must leaven the approach with common sense – with a vigilant eye toward fairness and security.

VALDOSTA — In 2016, Halloween was scary for all the wrong reasons.

Lowndes County sheriff’s deputies fanned out to check on residents on the state’s sex offender registry. The results: 344 in-person verifications, four warrants issued for non-compliant registrants (not living at their registered address) and one warrant issued for sexual exploitation of children (possession of child pornography), according to the sheriff’s office.

There were four arrests for violation of probation (participation in Halloween activities, which is forbidden to sex offenders under state law) and three warrants issued for violation of probation (were not home during Halloween activities), according to the sheriff’s office.

Georgia’s sex offender registry was created in 2006. This week, the newspapers in the SunLight Project areas of Valdosta, Thomasville, Tifton, Moultrie, Milledgeville and Dalton take a look at how law-enforcement agencies use the registry and deal with those registered.

WHAT IS THE REGISTRY?

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation maintains the state’s sex offender registry. Sheriff’s offices in each county are required to maintain a list of convicted sexual offenders and forward that information, including their addresses, to the GBI.

In Lowndes County, those duties fall to Amanda Giddens and Rodney Smith, investigators with the Lowndes County Sheriff’s Office.

Smith’s job is mostly field work: “I go out and check addresses, make sure they’re still there, every 30-45 days.”

Giddens mainly handles office duties.

“I handle the administrative side — paperwork, entry into the GBI system, handling prosecutions. I’m also a member of the GBI Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, handling prosecutions for those,” she said.

As of Nov. 28, In Lowndes County, there were 291 registered sex offenders: 32 incarcerated, one homeless, five absconded and wanted, and 26 who do not live in Lowndes but work or attend school in the county, Giddens said.

Lt. Tim Watkins, Thomas County Sheriff’s Office chief investigator, said Thomas County seems to have more reports of sex crimes than other places.

As of Nov. 25, Thomas County had 160 registered sex offenders. Ten people on the Thomas County sex offender registry were arrested in the last year for violating terms of the registry. Follow-ups were done on several more individuals on the list, but arrests were not made.

“The challenges facing sheriff’s offices around the state is that sex offender registration is an unfunded mandate on their agencies,” Watkins said.

He said his Criminal Investigations Division spends three man-hours a day on sex offenders. They also verify sex offenders’ addresses and employment several times a year.

WHO’S ON THE LIST?

In Lowndes County, the sex offender registry is almost a men’s-only club. Of the 313 registered offenders in Lowndes on the GBI’s most recent database, only six are women.

Smith said the most numerous crimes on the registry involve some sort of sexual battery. Exclusive of crimes against children, the GBI database lists 30 cases of rape and 34 cases of various violent sex-related crimes among Lowndes County’s registered offenders.

Giddens said among new offenders, the majority involve crimes against children. The state registry lists 97 cases of child molestation and 53 statutory rape cases in Lowndes County.

The difference between child molestation and statutory rape is one of age. Statutory rape is often “boyfriend-girlfriend, one older than the other,” Smith said. Statutory rape is often a plea deal argued down from child molestation, where the age difference is greater, he said.

The only statutory rape cases listed on the registry are felony convictions. Misdemeanor statutory rape is not a registry offense. To qualify as a misdemeanor, the offender must be younger than 18, with not more than a four-year age difference, Giddens said.

Lowndes County has 14 registered offenders officially marked as “predators.”

WORKING WITH THE REGISTRY

“I get daily calls from the public,” Giddens said. “I can tell if an offender lives on a street, but, by name, can only say ‘Yes, an offender lives at that address.'”

For more information, such as “how old was the child,” people  have to file an open records request, she said.

Most arrests of people already on the registry list are for moving without notifying the sheriff’s office, Smith said.

About five to 10 people a year are removed from the list, he said. Giddens said there is a procedure for petitioning the court for removal. It includes such requirements as: Must have finished any prison time at least a decade earlier, must have been classified by review board as low risk, no intentional physical harm involved in the original crime, no kidnappings and no crossing state lines.

The Valdosta Police Department primarily uses the registry as an investigative tool, Police Chief Leslie Manahan said.

“If we were searching for someone in a violent crime, it gives us an ability to locate people in our area, especially in stranger-to-stranger cases,” she said.

The chief cited a case from several years ago when a woman was assaulted downtown. The sex offender registry was one of several avenues toward identifying the woman’s attacker, she said.

The police are not involved in maintaining the registry, Manahan said.

The Lowndes County Sheriff’s Office “does an excellent job at that,” she said.

“For us, it’s a tool but the sheriff’s office actually gets to know the offenders,” Valdosta Police Lt. Scottie Johns said.

Statewide, the Department of Community Supervision is actively supervising 7,536 sex offenders and 224 sexually dangerous predators — those deemed by a review board as the worst offenders. After a Supreme Court ruling, 412 sexually dangerous predators were removed from GPS monitoring. The court ruled that tracking offenders with GPS devices after they had completed their sentences was unconstitutional.

In Colquitt County, though the sheriff’s office handles current registered sex offenders, the Moultrie Police Department handles sex offender cases just like any other case.

“It’s a top priority, of course,” Moultrie Police 1st Sgt. Justin Lindsay said.

WHERE DO THEY LIVE?

A map of Lowndes County’s sex offender registrants shows the greatest concentration is within the city limits of Valdosta.

“It could be because of family support; it could be because many motels fall in the perfect area outside of forbidden zones for sex offenders,” Manahan said. “They are required to have stable residency.”

A series of Georgia legal code amendments have created a four-tiered system to determine where convicted sex offenders can and cannot live, depending on the date of their conviction:

• For those convicted before June 4, 2003, there are no restrictions.

• For those convicted between June 4, 2003, and June 30, 2006: The offender may not live within 1,000 feet of any child-care facility, school or area where minors congregate.

• For those convicted between June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2008: A 1,000-foot buffer around churches, community swimming pools and day-care centers was added. Additionally, someone on the registry may not work at a business within 1,000 feet of those locations.

• For those convicted after July 1, 2008: A 1,000-foot buffer was added around public libraries, skating rinks and gymnasiums.

Smith said if a church or school were built close to where a sex offender was already living, the offender would get to stay.

HELP FOR THE VICTIMS

Many communities have organizations to help victims of sexual crimes.

In Thomas County, the Treehouse, a victims’ advocacy agency, does a tremendous job of making victims feel comfortable and in reporting and investigating the process necessary in the crimes, Lt. Watkins said.

“I believe the partnership with the district attorney’s office, The Treehouse and law enforcement has worked well in obtaining convictions of the offenders,” he said.

In Moultrie, the Hero House Child Advocacy Center has an average of two to three interviews a week. Regina Dismuke, Hero House director, recently did two in one day on Dec. 3. The monthly average she’s seen from Colquitt County and Moultrie together was 10 to 15 in a month, but some months have seen 22 interviews. Larger cases of sexual abuse can have four or five interviews.

“To be a successful forensic interviewer, you have to have a certain set of skills because when you’re talking to children your emotions cannot show on your face. You cannot show the disbelief of maybe what they’re saying,” Dismuke said.

In addition to Terry Richards, SunLight members Riley Bunch, Bryce Ethridge and Patti Dozier contributed to this report.

SEX OFFENDERS REGISTERED IN LOWNDES COUNTY BY CRIME:

Child molestation: 97

Statutory rape: 53

Enticing a child: 8

Child pornography: 1

Rape: 30

Sodomy: 1

Sexual battery on a child under 16: 7

Source: Georgia Bureau of Investigation Sex Offender Registry

Terry Richards is senior reporter at The Valdosta Daily Times.