Since 2008, people on sex offender registries in Missouri have been required to post a sign at their home each year on October 31: No candy or treats at this residence.

In a ruling issued October 2, a federal judge found the signs unconstitutional because they’re a form of “compelled speech”—when the state forces you to express a viewpoint you don’t agree with. Judge John A. Ross noted two other courts to previously address similar Halloween signs, both of which found them unconstitutional for the same reason. California overturned the requirement in 2012. Georgia did so in 2022, a year before I paroled out from Georgia Department of Corrections custody to begin navigating life on the registry.

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has already vowed to challenge the recent ruling. But the rest of Missouri’s “Halloween Statute” remains legally in effect, including the curfew that basically anyone on a sex offender registry anywhere in the country faces. In Missouri, for example, it’s still a misdemeanor to go outside on Halloween after 5:30 pm.

On October 31, myself and registrants across the country will be essentially be placed on house arrest. You’re required to make it look like no one’s home, which means not being allowed to answer your door or turn your outdoor lights on—in Georgia, this includes indoor lights. Parole or probation officers may intermittently come by to make sure you’re still sitting at home alone with the lights off.

For many that’s the best-case scenario. In Georgia, depending on your county or your parole officer, you might be required on October 31 to report to a designated location like a convention center, where they corral you with all the other registrants until morning. Or you might be required to turn yourself into the county jail.

The Georgia case cited by Judge Ross, Cory McClendon v. Gary Long, began in October 2018 when the Butts County Sheriff’s Office placed yard signs at the address of everyone registered in that county. Registrants were forbidden from covering or removing the signs before officers came around on November 1 to collect them. It was not the only Georgia county to do this.

Previously, registrants had been given flyers they were instructed to post on their doors. Butts County Sheriff Gary Long decided that wasn’t enough. Yet there was no evidence that yard signs protected trick-or-treaters from being assaulted by people on the registry. Not because the signs failed to be effective, but because the threat did not exist.

“[Long] even admitted that, since he took office in 2013, he had never had an issue with a registrant having unauthorized contact or reoffending with a minor on Halloween or at any other time,” district court judges stated in the 2022 ruling. “The Sheriff has not provided any record evidence that the registrants in Butts County actually pose a danger to trick-or-treating children or that these signs would serve to prevent such danger.”

Sex offender registries have little to nothing to do with keeping the nation’s children safe. Despite the state propaganda that encourages the public to associate registries with a stereotype of violent pedophiles, many people including myself are automatically required to register based on convictions that didn’t involve sexual assault—of children or anyone else—at all. Children are more likely to be on a registry themselves than to be assaulted by someone on a registry.

Sheriff Long falsely claimed that “Georgia law forbids registered sex offenders from participating in Halloween, to include decorations on their property.”

In 2018, Sheriff Long had claimed that “Georgia law forbids registered sex offenders from participating in Halloween, to include decorations on their property.” The circuit judges in McClendon v. Long found it “undisputed” that that claim was false; there is no such law. But for some people on the registry, there might as well be.

If you’re on parole or probation in Georgia, then whatever the law might say, your life is governed by the Department of Community Supervision. Each year, the department instructs us to not decorate or otherwise participate in Halloween. I was even recently denied permission to attend an adult costume party that will take place a full week before Halloween.

I know someone on the registry who, while still on probation, was living with his mom, a practicing Celtic Wiccan. As a witch, Halloween is a sacred day for her and traditions like jack-o’-lanterns carry spiritual meaning, and she wasn’t allowed to participate in them even inside her own home.

In theory, a parole office could enact a policy mandating the “No Candy” signs and one of us would have to take it to court. Which many people on the registry, but particularly those still under supervision, would be terrified to do. Courts are often loathe to depart from precedent, and no one wants to bring legal challenges that would just make the situation worse.

Top image via United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Inset image via Arkansas Department of Corrections.

Originally posted at Nothing Sums Up the Sex Offender Registry Quite Like Halloween

C Dreams

C is a writer and advocate interested in prison/criminal justice reform, LGBTQ rights, harm reduction and government/cultural criticism. She has studied history/theology with the Third Order of Carmelites and completed degrees in Systematic Theology. She is currently studying law.

The post FILTER MAG: Nothing Sums Up the Sex Offender Registry Quite Like Halloween appeared first on Restore Georgia.

“Communities explore other Halloween plans after sex offender law abolished,” announces a Missouri news outlet. This is in regard to the Missouri Supreme Court’s recent ruling that requiring those on the state sex offender registry to post “No candy here” signs at their homes is unconstitutional.

Even if the signage requirement were not only one part of a comprehensive set of restrictions, would this require that Halloween plans be changed?

Another media outlet says, “California’s tiered sex offender registry law allowed two convicted sex offenders to remain off list.” This is a reference to changes in the registry law in California that allows registrants to be removed after a certain length of time. This is part of a legal process, and a process followed in many states, not, as the article implies, some “loophole” that is used to skirt the law.

In spite of the online outlet Patch abandoning its “red dot” Halloween safety maps in virtually every state and location, a few Illinois editors are running them, “warning” parents where registrants in their communities live. NARSOL has done battle with Patch for years and are pleased that so few editors remain who are willing to defy all empirical evidence by printing this information.

Changing Halloween plans, dismay over legal registry procedures, and trick-or-treat “safety” maps—why would these have me shaking my head in wonder? Perhaps because I am old enough to remember the time when the registry and all it has spawned did not exist.

What was life like then? Were children molested while they were trick-or-treating? Did community members feel panic over who might live down the street? Were sexual crime and reoffenses rampant? Were children grabbed daily—or weekly—or monthly–out of school playgrounds and parks?

No.

Empirical evidence shows the rate of reoffense by those convicted of sexual offenses has remained steady over many years, both before the registry existed and since. As shown in an AI overview, “According to research, there is little evidence to suggest that sexual crime recidivism was significantly worse before the existence of sex offender registries, with most studies indicating that sex offenders generally have a low recidivism rate regardless of the registry system; in fact, some studies even suggest that public registration could potentially increase recidivism rates by making it harder for offenders to reintegrate into society and find employment, potentially leading to further criminal behavior.”

And as far as Halloween, this has been said many times, and it remains true: research reveals no instance of a child being abducted or molested by a person on the registry while trick-or-treating. As far as can be determined, the only time this has happened was pre-registry, in 1973—51 years ago—in Wisconsin. The victim was a little girl named Lisa French, and the perpetrator was someone who, even if there had been registries, would not have been registered.

This is a good place to remember that virtually all sexual crime against children is committed by those who are not already registered. What does this mean for Halloween?

Quoting myself from the Lisa French piece:

According to research, approximately 96% [of the perpetrators of sexual crime] have no previous history of this type of crime and therefore are on no registries. They aren’t locked up or confined to their homes with all lights off on Halloween. They aren’t checked on by law enforcement to assure that they are keeping themselves away from all child-related activities. They don’t show up as red dots on a map warning parents away from those addresses.

They are in your homes, at your parties, in your neighborhoods. They answer the doors and hand out candy to your children. They are where they have always been. And all of the Halloween restrictions on all of the people on sexual offense registries across America mean absolutely nothing.

Originally posted from NARSOL: https://www.narsol.org/2024/10/halloween-50-years-ago-and-now/

Written by Sandy Rozek

Sandy, a NARSOL board member, is communications director for NARSOL, editor-in-chief of the Digest, and a writer for the Digest and the NARSOL website. Additionally, she participates in updating and managing the website and assisting with a variety of organizational tasks.

The post NARSOL: Halloween 50 years ago and now appeared first on Restore Georgia.