John Couey passed away on September 30, 2009 due to complications from cancer. He had already been sentenced to death in 2007 for the rape and murder of 9-year-old Jessica Lunford in early 2005. Couey’s extensive criminal record includes one prior sex offense against a child in 1991. He was sentenced to five years in prison and served less than two. Completing his sentence would not have prevented him from murdering Jessica but I would argue that the early release of an adult convicted of indecent assault against a child under the age of 16 really illustrates the true value that our society places on the lives of children.

Jessica’s Law was passed in Florida in 2005 with the intention of reducing the ability of sex offenders to reoffend. The Jessica Lunsford Act was also introduced in 2005 at the federal level but was never enacted. Key provisions of Jessica’s Law in Florida include mandatory minimum sentences of 25 years in prison and lifetime electronic monitoring of adults convicted of “lewd or lascivious acts” against a child under 12 years old. Rape and sexual battery of a child under 12 carries life imprisonment with no chance of parole. Jessica’s Law has been enacted across the nation with just a few states holding out.

The electronic monitoring is especially important. You see, John Couey was actually living at a residence other than the one he reported when he registered as a sex offender. Megan’s Law ensured that sex offenders had to register and Jessica’s Law followed it up to try to plug the holes that were missed. It is Jessica’s Law where you find those definitions of how many feet away from a school a registered sex offender may reside, or ever physically be. The idea is that if we know where these offenders are every moment we can prevent, or at least reduce, the ability of an offender to reoffend.

These “reactionary” laws sound good on paper but are they really worth it? Jessica’s Law in California has contributed to the situation in Antioch, California where Philip Garrido kept Jaycee Dugard for 18 years. Antioch is home to 122 registered sex offenders who have found residence in other cities impossible due to the residential restrictions enacted by Jessica’s Law. At least we know where they are, right?

Let’s take a look at Philip Garrido. He was a registered sex offender. Law enforcement knew where he was. They even visited his home in 2006 that he had children living in his backyard but officers did not bother to go into the home or the backyard to investigate. It’s quite possible that with the supervision demands of 122 offenders that things slip. Recently, we also received news about a group of offenders camping in Georgia because they have no where else to go (Georgia’s law prohibits convicted sex offenders from residing within 1,000 feet of areas where children gather). Unintended consequence to be sure, but we need to remember that if we force these individuals to far away we will cease to know where they are.

<script src=”http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/js/2.0/video/evp/module.js?loc=dom&vid=/video/us/2009/09/29/nr.sex.offenders.campsite.cnn” type=”text/javascript”></script><noscript>Embedded video from <a href=”http://www.cnn.com/video”>CNN Video</a></noscript>

Garrido had previously been convicted of violently kidnapping and raping a woman in Nevada and received a sentence of 50 years, of which he served a mere ten (incidentally, Garrido nearly got away with this one too as the officer who first came upon the scene initially believed Garrido’s assertion that he and his victim were merely lovers in a spat ignoring the woman’s desperate pleas otherwise).

John Couey was also interviewed twice by police during the search for Jessica Lunsford and she was still alive the first time and may have been during the second. Surely, the police positively identified every person they spoke with and would have known that Couey was a sex offender. Is there any way within the law to increase scrutiny of sex offenders in an investigation such as the one that followed Jessica’s disappearance in 2005?

Had Philip Garrido served his entire sentence he would not have been free to abduct Jaycee Dugard. But, again we see a little snapshot of the long-lasting ideas that the lives of women and children are inconsequential. Society frequently cheapens the effects of a sexual assault against a woman. It’s as if they are saying to victims, “well, it didn’t really hurt, did it?” Or even, as Whoopi recently said, “it’s not rape-rape.” I mean come on, why else do you have that hole there, you slut?

Reactionary laws are rarely the answer to our problems and some of these laws may even bring into question Constitutional issues. We need to find a better way to protect our children from sex offenders and I have a few small suggestions:

1. Pay attention to how we talk about sex offenses and especially the victims of these crimes. Really, does anyone else find it ironic that Woody Allen is defending Roman Polanski? Look at all the language surrounding Mackenzie Phillips’ recent revelations.

2. Be specific in our terminology when labeling offenders, allow judges the ability to apply common sense to sentencing (i.e. remove mandatory sentencing guidelines) and use sex offender registries effectively. Wisconsin’s age of consent is 18, there is an abundance of “Romeo & Juliet” sex offenders required to register in that state that do not belong in the same places as Philip Garrido and John Couey. There are more than 500,000 registered sex offenders across our nation, now many of these are “Romeo & Juliet” cases that should come off of the rolls thus relieving the burden on law enforcement (which would actually make our children safer)? Sex offender registries need to be reserved for those most likely to reoffend and the most dangerous. Get the public urinators off the list. Additionally, legislation in many states is unfairly slanted against GLBT people (think about sodomy laws, would consenting adults be guilty in your state?).

3. Most importantly, be a person that your child can talk to. I never told my dad about the abuse I experienced because I was afraid of how he would react. I did tell my mother. She called me a slut. I’m certain that additional children were abused because of my silence. Most abusers are known to the family putting the child in a precarious position. We see the monsters on TV but we need to remember that there are a lot of other monsters that never make it there and they are infinitely more dangerous. Additionally, I believe that if sex offenders are driven underground by increasingly restrictive residence laws they find themselves in an environment like Antioch, CA…where it’s easy to reoffend.

4. I am also a fan of “family” restrooms and nearly have a panic attack any time I wait for my young son to emerge from the men’s room. A repeat offender in my area accosted his last victim in a public restroom. My panicky response is natural but I know that my son is much more likely to be abused by someone we know rather than by some sicko stranger in a public place. In other words, he is much more likely to be abused by someone who is not on that list…

These are not enough but they are a start.

I referenced the following articles and websites for this post:

Jessica’s Law Eyes Sex Offenders
House 1877: Relating to Jessica Lunsford Act
Florida Gets Tough New Child Sex Law
Convicted Child Killer Couey Dies in Prison
Florida Department of Corrections
How Jessica’s Law turned Antioch into a Paedophile Ghetto
Whoopie Goldberg Defends Roman Polanski: ‘It wasn’t rape-rape’
Questions Arise on Monitoring of Sex Offenders
Hysteria Hits Home – Michigan’s Unfair Anti-Sex Laws
A Sad Lesson in ‘Know Thy Neighbour‘