New Jersey. Sexual Offender Registration Act of 1994
Megan's Laws are named for Megan Kanka, a seven-year-old girl from New Jersey who was sexually assaulted and murdered in 1994 by a neighbor who, unknown to the victim's family, had been previously convicted for sex offenses against children. Megan's Laws are state and federal statutes that require convicted sex offenders to register with local police. Sex offenders are required to register with local police and to notify law enforcement authorities whenever they move to a new location. The statutes establish a notification process to provide information about sex offenders to law enforcement agencies and, when appropriate, to the public. The type of notification is based on an evaluation of the risk to the community from a particular offender.
The brutality of the crimes in the Megan Kanka case provided the impetus for laws that mandate registration of sex offenders and corresponding community notification. In 1994, Congress passed the Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act, Title 17, 108 Stat.2038, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 14071. This precursor to a federal Megan's Law conditioned certain federal law enforcement funds on state adoption of sexoffender registration laws and set minimum standards for state programs. By 1996, every State, the District of Columbia, and the Federal Government had enacted some variation of Megan's Law.
Under the federal Megan's Law statute, states have discretion to establish criteria for disclosure, but they must make private and personal information on registered sex offenders available to the public. The premise of Megan's Law is that communities will be better able to protect their children if they are informed of the descriptions and whereabouts of high-risk sex offenders. Notification of sex-offender information to the community assists law enforcement in investigations, provides legal grounds to detain known sex offenders, may deter sex offenders from committing new offenses, and offers citizens information that they can use to protect their children.
Megan's Laws were not created without controversy. Opponents argue that the statutes encourage acts of vigilantism and do not give offenders who have paid their dues the chance to merge back into society. But actions taken against the convicted sex offender, including vandalism of property, verbal or written threats, or actual physical violence against the offender, their family, or employer, could lead to arrest and prosecution for criminal acts. Despite these concerns, however, federal and state legislatures have continued to reinforce and broaden the scope of these statutes.
On May 17, 1996, federal efforts to strengthen the Jacob Wetterling Act got a boost when President bill clinton signed an amendment to the violent crime control and law enforcement act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14071); the amendment is known as Megan's Law. This legislation directs all state legislatures to adopt laws requiring convicted sex offenders to register with their local law enforcement agency after release. Additionally, the federal Megan's Law mandates states to grant access to sex-offender registries to the public. Although sex-offender registration for law enforcement purposes had been required previously, the idea of community notification was relatively new.
The legislation has undergone many adaptations in the states. While the details of state Megan's Laws differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, conviction of any one or more of the following offenses will require convicts to register pursuant to Megan's Laws:
- aggravated sexual assault,
- sexual assault,
- aggravated criminal sexual contact,
- endangering the welfare of a child by engaging in sexual conduct that would impair or debauch the morals of the child,
- luring or enticing,
- kidnapping (if the victim is a minor and the offender not a parent),
- criminal restraint, and
- false imprisonment.
Megan's Laws have guidelines that list factors law that enforcement agencies are to consider when weighing the risk of re-offense. These include some or all of the following:
- post-incarceration supervision,
- the status of therapy or counseling,
- criminal background,
- degree of remorse for criminal acts,
- substance abuse,
- employment or schooling status,
- psychological or psychiatric profile, and
- any history of threats or of stalking locations where children congregate.
State sex offender registries include sex offenders' names, descriptions and photographs, addresses, places of employment or school (if applicable), descriptions of the offenders' vehicles and license plate numbers, and brief descriptions of the offenses for which the sex offender was convicted. Prosecutors and courts are responsible for determining who should receive direct notice of the presence of a particular individual in a community.
In 2003, 39 states provided access to sexoffender information in searchable databases on the internet. Arkansas, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, Rhode Island, and Vermont either did not provide Internet access or restricted access. Various law enforcement agencies and some private citizens or civic groups also publish listings that are specific to counties or communities. Most, if not all, of these sites are freely available regardless of the residence of the individual who is searching for information.
As with the state laws themselves, state sexoffender databases have little or no uniformity. Some, like those for Alaska, Connecticut, and Florida, include photographs, physical descriptions, dates of birth, and details concerning the offenses for which offenders were convicted. The Virginia sex-offender list stores home and work addresses, while Indiana's contains only the city where the sex offender resides.
Most of the databases permit searching by zip code or name. Kansas allows searching by partial zip codes, while Alaska and Delaware allow searching by street name or by partial address, and Indiana permits searching by social security number.
While Megan's Laws do provide some measure of increased security for some parents and individuals who are concerned about the likelihood of convicted sex offenders in their midst, they cannot guarantee the public's protection from offenders who are determined to re-offend. The statutes cannot even guarantee absolute accuracy of the information contained on their registries. While offenders must register with the local police upon release from prison, many give incomplete or even false details. Others have given their details, but have traveled to areas where no one has been warned about them for the purposes of committing additional sex offenses. Critics of the measures point out that only 80 percent of pedophiles comply with registration requirements in the US, as compared
with 97 percent in the United Kingdom. They also note that most cases of child abuse occur within the family, and suggest that victims might stay silent if they know that a family member will be prosecuted. But in spite of these arguments, Megan's Laws receive widespread support in communities and legislatures.
In addition to compliance and enforcement problems with Megan's Laws, privacy advocates have challenged existing public-records laws that allow the availability of personal data via websites. In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down major decisions upholding the constitutionality of Megan's Laws. The Court upheld Connecticut's Megan's Law by a vote of 9 to 0 and upheld Alaska's legislation in a 6-to-3 decision.
In Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety v. Doe, 123 S. Ct. 1160, 155 L. Ed. 2d 98, 71 USLW 4125, 71 USLW 4158, 3 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1957, 2003 Daily Journal D.A.R. 2471, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 140 (2003). Connecticut's Megan's Law was challenged by a convicted sex offender, john doe. Doe protested that the Internet listing violated his due process rights because he was never given a hearing to disprove the suggestion that he might represent a continuing danger to the community. A federal judge and a three-judge federal appeals court panel agreed with Doe, striking down the law. But the Supreme Court overturned those decisions, stating that the key factor causing sex offenders to be listed in Connecticut's Internet registry is a prior conviction for a sex offense, not whether an individual might present a continued danger to the community.
The court said that statutes such as Connecticut's Megan's Law provide an important service that helps to protect society from those who would prey on its weakest members. Even though Megan's Laws create certain burdens for sex offenders, the court wrote that such laws do not amount to a form of ex post facto punishment, nor do they violate the Constitution's due process requirements.
In the Alaska case, Smith v. Doe, 123 S. Ct. 1140, 155 L. Ed. 2d 164, 71 USLW 4125, 71 USLW 4182, 3 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1974, 2003 Daily Journal D.A.R. 2474, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S. 142 (2003) (No. 01-729). Alaska's Megan's Law was challenged by two convicted sex offenders who already had served their prison sentences prior to passage of that state's version of the law. The two men, John Doe I and John Doe II, argued that the law was another form of punishment imposed after they already had completed their punishment. They claimed that the law failed to recognize the possibility that they might be rehabilitated and that they might no longer pose a danger to others. In previous litigation, a federal judge found no ex post facto violation, but an appeals court panel reversed, striking down the law.
The high court wrote that Alaska's Megan's Law is a civil, non-punitive regulatory effort to account for the whereabouts of convicted sex offenders. Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy stated that there was nothing in the statute to suggest that the legislature intended to create anything other than a civil scheme designed to protect the public from harm. And even though the law applied to sex offenders who already had been released from prison, it was not an extra form of punishment.
In these two cases, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively disposed of the principal legal arguments against Megan's Laws. In short, the Court found that state laws that are designed to use the Internet to notify parents of the presence of convicted rapists and child molesters in their own neighborhoods do not violate the constitutional rights of the listed sex offenders.
Ahearn, Laura A. 2001. Megan's Law Nationwide and… The Apple of My Eye: Childhood Sexual Abuse Prevention Program. N.Y.: Prevention Press USA.
Cohen, Fred, and Elizabeth Rahmberg-Walsh. 2001. Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification: A 'Megan's Law' SourceBook. Kingston, N.J.: Civic Research Institute.
Hodgson, James F., and Debra S. Kelley, eds. 2002. Sexual Violence: Policies, Practices, and Challenges in the United States and Canada. Westport, Conn: Praeger.
By: U.S. Congress
Date: May 17, 1996.
Source: "Megan's Law." Title 42 U.S. Code 14071(d), May 17, 1996.
On July 29, 1994, seven year old Megan Kanka was playing near her home in Hamilton Township, New Jersey. A neighbor who lived directly across the street, Jesse Timmendequas, lured her to his home by promising to show Megan his puppy. Timmendequas was a convicted sex offender, with convictions in 1979 and 1981 for aggravated sexual assault and attempted sexual conduct on two children ages seven and five. Megan's parents, Richard and Maureen Kanka, were unaware of Timmendequas' history.
According to Timmendequas' confession to police, he raped Megan, then covered her head with plastic bags and strangled her, to prevent her from telling her parents or authorities. He then dumped her body in the weeds at a nearby park. Megan's parents had alerted police to her disappearance after they went around the neighborhood, canvassing neighbors. Timmendequas spoke to them, telling the Kankas he had seen Megan earlier, playing outside. When police canvassed the neighborhood shortly after, Timmendequas appeared to be nervous in conversations with the officers. A police background check revealed his criminal record, along with the sex offender status of his two roommates, both convicted felons. Twenty-four hours after the police searches began, Timmendequas confessed to her murder and led authorities to Megan's body.
Richard and Maureen Kanka, in the aftermath of Megan's murder, began to advocate for sex offender registration laws that allowed the public to know where a sex offender lived and/or worked. The Kankas repeatedly stated in newspaper interviews that had they known about Timmendequas' convictions against children, and the sex offender status of his roommates, they would have been better able to assess risk in their neighborhood and protect their daughter.
Sex offender registry laws were not new; their genesis can be traced back to California in the 1940s. At the time of Megan's murder, Oregon had just passed a sex offender registry law. The Kankas petitioned the New Jersey legislature to pass a law similar to that in Oregon; in late 1994, Megan's Law legislation passed both houses of the New Jersey legislature and became law just eighty days after Megan's murder.
President William Clinton signed a federal version of Megan's Law in 1996. The federal Megan's Law was an amendment of the 1994 Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act, which had already mandated the creation of state sex offender registries. Under Megan's Law, the public now had the right to know about sex offenders, their names, addresses, and crimes committed. States that did not comply with the law risked losing federal funds for law enforcement.
To amend the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 to require the release of relevant information to protect the public from sexually violent offenders. «NOTE: May 17, 1996—[H.R. 2137]»
SECTION 1. «NOTE: 42 USC 13701 note.» SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as "Megan's Law".
SEC. 2. RELEASE OF INFORMATION AND CLARIFICATION OF PUBLIC NATURE OF INFORMATION.
Section 170101(d) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14071(d)) is amended to read as follows:
(d) Release of Information.—
- The information collected under a State registration program may be disclosed for any purpose permitted under the laws of the State.
- (2) The designated State law enforcement agency and any local law enforcement agency authorized by the State agency shall release relevant information that is necessary to protect the public concerning a specific person required to register under this section, except that the identity of a victim of an offense that requires registration under this section shall not be released.
Approved May 17, 1996.
The Kankas promoted Megan's Law as a protective measure to promote public awareness of sex offenders in neighborhoods; current psychological research indicates that those who commit sex offenses against children have the highest recidivism rates among criminal populations.
Opponents of sex offender registry laws argue that these laws punish convicted offenders who served their sentence. By forcing the convicted sex offender to publicly announce his or her crime through registration, the offender faces a second sentence of sorts. In addition, a small percentage of sex offenders are charged with statutory rape, in cases where an eighteen year old perpetrator has sexual relations with a fif-teen year old. In some of these cases, the fifteen year old gave verbal consent, but legally is under the age of consent, and rape charges applied. In addition, nonviolent sex offenses, such as public indecency or lewd acts, require the convicted criminal to register as a sex offender; critics of this policy point to the destructive impact such registration has on the career, housing, and community involvement of such non-violent offenders.
In two 2003 United States Supreme Court decisions, Smith v. Doe, 01-729 and Connecticut Dept. of Public Safety v. Doe, 01-1231, the court determined that the laws do not violate the rights of offenders and do not constitute punishment after having served one's sentence. The laws are designed to regulate and to disseminate information of vital public important, the court said.
Police departments and states turned to the Internet as a vehicle for providing information about sex offender registries. The United States Department of Justice hosts the National Sex Offender Public Registry, in which users conduct searches by state and zip code. Each state sets different terms for the release of public information; some states provide public information on all sex offenders while others maintain registries for all, but release information to the public only for those offenders classified as likely to offend again.
On May 30, 1997, Jesse Timmendequas was convicted on counts of capital murder, kidnapping and aggravated sexual assault and sentenced to death. He remained on New Jersey's death row as of 2006.
Registries in the United States track more than 500,000 sex offenders nationwide.
J. Craissati. Managing High Risk Sex Offenders in the Community; A Psychological Approach. Brunner-Routledge2000.
Brooks, Alexander D. "Megan's Law: Constitutionality and Policy." Criminal justice Ethics vol. 15, 1996.
Bureau of Justice Assistance. "Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children And Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act." 〈http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/what/02ajwactcontents.html〉 (accessed March 27, 2006).
National Sex Offender Public Registry. 〈http://www.nsopr.gov/〉 (accessed March 27, 2006).
Megan's Law is a generic term for a statute providing for community notification of the whereabouts of convicted sex offenders following their release from prison. Such a statute is generally coupled with a law requiring the registration of released sex offenders. The girl whose name become synonymous with this legislation, seven-year-old Megan Kanka, was raped and killed in 1994 by Jesse Timmendequas, a twice-convicted sex offender who had moved in across the street from her home in suburban Hamilton, New Jersey. That Timmendequas had been diagnosed as a "repetitive-compulsive sexual offender" and incarcerated in New Jersey's treatment center for sex offenders at Avenel gave shape to the outrage provoked by his crime. If Americans still saw sex offenders as "sick," they no longer believed that experts could treat and rehabilitate them. That loss of faith diminished the concern with the childhood origins of sex offending, with how to prevent men from becoming offenders, that had emerged in the 1930s. Evidence that offenders had themselves been victims as children was in the 1990s increasingly dismissed as the "abuse excuse." If experts and courts could not protect children from sex offenders, then that task fell to the community, almost inevitably represented as composed of parents. This argument rested on the untested notion that if his neighbors had known about Timmendequas, they could have prevented his crime, and it involved a radical move to public participation in the task of surveillance previously given to police departments or other public agencies.
Campaigns for community notification laws relied on the political and symbolic power of the innocent child. Attaching the name and the image of a child victim, either Megan Kanka or a local child, to the law tapped emotions already aroused by a broader anxiety about the "disappearance" of a sheltered, innocent childhood, and made opposition, and even reflection, politically difficult. This was influenced in part by the widespread fear and alarm that had been increasingly attached to "stranger" abductions since the 1970s. Rallying around the innocent child, a grassroots movement succeeded in having community notification and/or sexoffender registration laws adopted by all fifty states, and by the federal government, by 2002.
Despite widespread adoption, Megan's laws remained highly controversial. Critics argued that the laws were punitive rather than regulatory, and therefore contravened constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment and ex post facto laws, as well as violating offenders' right to privacy. In practice, critics claimed, the laws encouraged vigilantism, and made the rehabilitation of offenders virtually impossible. Megan's laws were also charged with diverting attention from the majority of sex crimes, those committed within families. From that perspective, the laws were part of a backlash against the focus on incest and child abuse that feminists had helped promote since the 1960s. In February 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to decide whether Alaska's notification law amounted to extra punishment in violation of the Constitution's ban on ex post facto laws. The Court upheld the law in March 2003.
See also: Law, Children and the; Pedophilia; Sexuality.
Cole, Simon A. 2000. "From the Sexual Psychopath Statute to 'Megan's Law': Psychiatric Knowledge in the Diagnosis, Treatment, and Adjudication of Sex Criminals in New Jersey, 1949–1999." Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 55: 292–314.
Davis, Peter. 1996. "The Sex Offender Next Door." The New York Times Magazine July 28: 20–27.
Parents for Megan's Law. 2000. "Megan's Law Clearinghouse." Available from <www.parentsformeganslaw.com>.
MEGAN'S LAW. The term refers to a type of statute passed following the 1994 death of a seven-year-old girl named Megan Kanka, who was raped and killed by a sex offender on parole who lived across the street from her in Hamilton, New Jersey. First New Jersey and then most other states adopted some version of "Megan's Law." These laws require public notice that a sex offender is moving into a neighborhood, on the theory that people on notice will take increased care to protect their children. The relevant portion of the federal Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 was amended in 1996 to require states to adopt procedures for neighborhood notification. The information disclosed about individuals is quite specific, with distinctions made in various state statutes between different types of information (addresses, photographs, descriptions of modus operandi) and the degree of risk to the community. Many states have set up Web sites giving information about sex offenders.
Megan's Laws are highly controversial because of a conflict between the protection of the public and the protection of the privacy rights of offenders who have served their sentences and been released.
It was named after Megan Kanka, a 7-year-old girl who was murdered in 1994 in New Jersey, US, by a convicted child sex offender living near her home.