U.S. needs to keep Megan's Law

by Amanda Stutevoss
Editor in Chief

A week after high-risk sex offender Eric Kristian Rosvold moved back into his girlfriend's Cork Circle home in La Verne, the United States Supreme Court was reviewing questions of constitutional violations surrounding Megan's Law.

For the first time since 1996, the Supreme Court will be hearing challenges to the federal law that requires convicted sex offenders to register with law enforcement authorities and allows communities to know where the sex offenders are living.

Last spring, La Verne was plastered with community warning posters revealing that Rosvold was living on Cork Circle above Baseline, only a few minutes' walk away from Oak Mesa Elementary.

In April, a Marin County judge revised Rosvold's probation so he was prohibited from living within 1,500 feet of a school. Rosvold pleaded with the judge, saying he could not afford to move. Instead, he ended up returning to jail in exchange for a shortened probation.

Now, five months later, he is back in La Verne the same time that the Supreme Court is considering whether Megan's Law goes too far with regard to convicted felons and their privacy rights.

Megan Kanka was a typical seven-year old girl who lived in a suburban area of Trenton, N.J. The streets were always filled with children her age. However, in this community not only families and young children lived here, but also three convicted sex offenders that none of the neighbors knew about.

At that time their criminal histories were concealed by their constitutional right to privacy.

Kanka disappeared on a Friday in 1994. She was lured into her neighbor's house by a puppy and then raped, strangled and suffocated. Her dead body was stuffed into a plastic toy box and then left in a nearby park.

Her killer was a twice-convicted sex-offender.

This case was instrumental in the development of the federal law known as Megan's Law. Under the law in California, convicted sex-offenders must register with law enforcement agencies within five working days of entering the county or city. They must submit fingerprints, photos, blood and saliva samples, among other requirements.

Versions of Megan's Law are being challenged in Connecticut and Alaska. Connecticut defense lawyers say that the law violates the offenders' right to due process. The challenge in Alaska states that the law's enforcement amounts to additional punishment for offenders who have already served their time.

These challenges could potentially affect 25 other states that have similar laws. In California alone there are 95,401 registered sex offenders and only 72 percent of all sex offenders living in California are currently in compliance with these laws.

Megan's Law, which has slightly different modes of enforcement depending on the state, is in place for a good reason. Challenging whether these laws are constitutional is nonsensical. The question of whether Megan's Law is an infringement of these predators' rights to privacy seems hypocritical. What about their victims' rights to privacy? What happened to their constitutional rights and protections?

Isn't protecting the safety of innocent children more important than protecting a sexual predator's rights to privacy? Especially considering the fact that most of those who are prosecuted for such crimes have probably offended before and likely to offend again.

It has been proven that the most reliable prediction of sexual behavior is a past record of this kind of behavior. Released prisoners commit 54 times more violent crime within the first year of their release than average citizens do per year, according to the most recent national study of recidivism in the United States.

So why would discussion even be necessary? Although rehabilitation may be possible, it is not a guarantee. Weakening Megan's Law leaves children unarmed and helpless against sex offenders who decide to sacrifice their constitutional rights when they commit a crime.

I am concerned about children's rights. Not notifying parents and community members of potentially dangerous paroled sex offenders is a risk that should not be toyed with. These sexual predators believe that Megan's Law gives them a negative stigma in the eyes of community members. My question is why were they not concerned with the repercussions before committing such heinous crimes?

Those who commit these types of crimes should be ready to face the consequences of their actions. In the words of Marcus Cicero, "Let the punishment match the offense."

Amanda Stutevoss, a senior broadcasting and journalism major, is editor in chief of the Campus Times. She can be reached by e-mail at astute4@aol.com.