On the Money Trail With Oregon's Latest Sex Offender Bill

5-24-2011 Oregon:

This story begs the question: why would the state suddenly seek to broaden the list by including all sex offenders, rather than those who are predatory?

(SALEM, Ore.) - The sponsor of new proposed legislation that would require all sex offenders to become part of a government registry, State Representative Kim Thatcher (R) Keizer, recently brought forth a significant bill to increase state government transparency.

Logically, she would understand our quest to follow the money trail behind SB 67 and HR 2765; proposals which would disrupt the lives of any person ever convicted of a sex offense, regardless of how minor, by forcing their names onto yet another taxpayer funded public computer registry.

First, I must say that I have yet to hear of a child surviving a sexual molestation because their parents spotted a would-be convicted sex offender in a mandated state computer registry. I'm not saying it hasn't happened, or that we would even necessarily know, what I am saying however that we are a bit low on success stories stemming from Oregon's mandatory sex offender registry.

We do however know many stories of police and state authorities not fully investigating claims of sex abuse; we know the state Dept of Human Services will place children with known sex offenders; I don't see what the government can gain in terms of public safety by helping one or two people in the 'background investigation' business spike their incomes.

This story begs the question: why would the state suddenly seek to broaden the list by including all sex offenders, rather than those who are predatory?

I don't personally care if my neighbor got drunk and went streaking during a college party, do you? I don't care about minor adjudicated offenses being resurrected for the sake of further invading privacy. I don't care if Joey screwed Sally and she was 17 and he was 19, I don't think very many people care. However I know there are tens of thousands of sex offender families who would appreciate their names not being drug through the mud with legislation that sounds good at face value, but in fact faces several obstacles, including privacy issues from HUD (Housing and Urban Development)

Again, back to that money trail with Rep. Thatcher. Drop in the toll, here we go.

Vroooom

"Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the money trail; the super information highway, where you are about to meet Dan Meister...

Rep Thatcher said she sponsored HB 2765 on behalf of Daniel Meister. Mr. Meister testified before the Senate Judiciary in support of SB 67. This is noteworthy, because Meister runs a private business called Pacific Screening, Inc., providing--for a membership fee-- background checks/screenings for various organizations (apartment communities and public housing the biggies but also churches, businesses large and small, non-profits, schools, and private citizens.)

It would appear that Mr. Meister is pushing this legislation in the interest of private profit. (Pacific Screening employees 5-9 people and posts an annual revenue of $500k-$1 million.)

In support of Senate Bill 67 he wrote (unedited):

"It is critical that the Oregon State Police be allowed the release the unrestricted names of sex offenders registered in Oregon.

"Organizations such as apartment communities, public housing agencies, churches, businesses large and small, non-profit groups, schools and private citizens rely on the Oregon State Police information.

"They rely on this information to be correct, up to date and complete. Organizations are basing rental decisions, employment decisions and volunteer decisions on this information... unfortunately, this information is not complete. The current Oregon Sex Offender Web sites does not contain the a majority of sex offenders currently living in the state."

- Daniel Meister, Pacific Screening Inc. 'Quality Applicant Research Services'

I would deem 'critical' the pending result of any such legislation. I would also note that there is a good reason that people aren't listed; because they served their time, made restitution, and moved on. Dragging skeletons out of closets is bad business. There are things called 'rights' that perhaps are being overlooked.

I can only imagine how difficult life must be for those who become a 'sex offender' and then manage to regain control of their lives; to assume their place in society with jobs and responsibilities, only to suddenly be re-exposed for a crime they have already paid their dues for, in a quirky double jeopardy framework, under Thatcher and Meister's sex background microscope law.

People who offend children are already on the list, and they don't come off. This is needless big government control at its finest, cleverly using political law to raise the incomes of a limited few while stripping and further eroding the rights of Oregonians.

I have a close friend who is a sex offender because he and his fiance were petting too heavily in a parked car at Bush Park in Salem. They have been married for years, have children, but that event is still on his record, and this would force my friend into a bizarre place that would utterly misrepresent him.

It's also worth noting that Meister's testimonial letter ends with broad, unsubstantiated claims and resorts to fear tactics in order to justify this legislation as being of emergency interest to the state:

In my biggest customer group, the apartment communities, are missing sex offenders every day. Not every sex offender we screen has a county criminal record (OJIN), but they are listed as a sex offender with the state. We just can not get the information. The law needs to change. If offenders are left off the sex offender list, we can not do a complete criminal search. At this time, the current Oregon Sex Offender Web sites does not contain the majority of sex offenders currently living in the state.

- Daniel Meister, 'Pacific Screening Inc. Quality Applicant Research Services'

I don't envy Thatcher or others in her shoes, nor do I doubt that she has the better interests of voters at heart. I really liked her transparency bill. Oregon's legislators carry a heavy load and they are tasked with mountainous responsibility. Knowing that to be the case, it is easy to understand how ideas presented to legislators that are well greased and presented with passion, are easy to be tricked by. To me the victim list expands when these things happen to include the legislators themselves. People like Thatcher know that it is important for all Oregonians to have a roof over their heads, and this bill would lead to past offenders losing jobs and housing and being tossed onto the streets. That will raise the danger level, not lower it.

Chasing Sex Offenders

I have some time with this subject, having spent the past 23 years in news. Before that, when I was a U.S. Marine on guard (barracks) duty, I caught a man, another Marine, who had allegedly tried to rape a young civilian woman visiting the base on a Saturday night. I pulled the guy out of a car and pinned him down in a phone booth as I called the MP's. I'm as serious as anyone about protecting the virtue of my fellow citizens.

Still, I have learned a great deal over the years and it isn't all about catching bad guys, however vividly those moments stand out.

My most memorable event was chasing the man known as 'Polk County's Most Notorious Sex Offender' Larry Lee Edwards, down the street as a camera man with KATU Channel-2 News with my 30+ pound TV camera and actually catching him, and making him talk. I was really proud of myself, but my ultimate lesson about Edwards, and all sex offenders, is that they are people too, regardless of how they may disgust us.

I met his father and interviewed him at the time, and the senior Mr. Edwards told me about how his son was in the Navy; how he had traveled the world and accomplished a great deal, but then suffered a long-term relationship break up that ruined him emotionally, and ultimately he responded by raping two young boys in the Dallas area.

When I chased Edwards down the street that day, he had just been released from 14 years in prison, and he had no place to live, so he was staying in an abandoned field in Dallas. This to me is the reality of further juxtaposing human beings based on their individual records. Guys like Larry Lee Edwards are potentially dangerous, their crimes were hugely significant, and they will always easily and quickly be found on a registry. But that guy who streaked down the road at a drunken frat party is who this legislation would float to the front and there is no need for this when taxpayer revenues are already strained and the authorities themselves are failing in their roles.

Instead let's clean up shop, hold cops and social workers accountable, and not waste taxpayer funds wrecking the lives of those who have paid their dues, done their time.

If this measure in enacted it would place approx 18,000 people on the registry. It passed the Senate 30-0 and has moved to the House.

One person who contacted Salem-News.com but preferred to not use their name, made another strong point, that is the way a reckless law like this would in fact endanger the families of sex offenders who are leading legal productive lives. These people are as innocent as anyone and equally significant.

The proposed Senate bill moved quickly at first but the legislation has slowed, as legislators agreed to move it to a work session, the next work session is set for tomorrow, Tuesday, 24 May 2011, at the capital, 1:00 p.m. in Room 343. ..Source.. by Tim King: Salem-News.com Editor and Writer