Policy-makers and state officers are wary juveniles would be swept up in the registry requirements of a federal law that creates a national database for sex offenders.
The prevailing sentiment among some members of a state panel is that Arizona should be cautious in complying wholesale with the federal Adam Walsh Act, which was signed into law last year.
Much of the wariness stems from a provision of the federal law that requires youngsters convicted of certain types of sexual offenses to register as a sex offender. These include people as young 14 who had sexual conduct with a 12-year-old girl.
Under the Adam Walsh Act, information required for the registry would include not just name, address and criminal history, but also a physical description of an offender, photograph, fingerprints, the name and address of his or her employers, and the name and address of the school an offender attends.
“We cannot afford to be treating our juveniles as predators,” said Chris Phillis of the Maricopa County Public Defender’s Office. Phillis testified on the impact of the federal law on Arizona’s sex offender statutes during a hearing of the state Community Notification and Guidelines Committee.
Youthful offenders whose personal information is accessible on the Internet could be subjected to harassment and could be socially ostracized, said Phillis.
Sen. Karen Johnson, R-18, co-chair of the committee, said that would cause “irreparable harm.”
Johnson has been pushing for legislation to ease laws on youthful, non-violent sex offenders, or what is referred to as “Romeo-Juliet” type of cases.
Failure to comply with the federal act would result in a 10 percent reduction in the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Funds, which augments money used for crime prevention. In Arizona, the money is used on drug, gang and violent crime strategy.
Under Arizona’s laws, registration is not mandatory but discretionary on the part of the judge. Also, registration is terminated when the juvenile reaches 25.
Since the mid-1990s, Arizona has notified communities about sex offenders released from jail or on probation. The offenders’ information is entered into a statewide database, a portion of which involves risk assessment, which is designed to predict an offender’s risk of recidivism.
There are three types of notification: Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3, with Level 3 posing the highest risk of re-offending. The differences in the types of notification vary depending on the likelihood of re-offending.
The Adam Walsh Act, on the other hand, uses three “tiers” instead of risk assessment levels. The tiers are based on the type of offense committed.
During her testimony, Phillis said she largely prefers Arizona’s sex offender laws, which use risk assessments. A fact can sound “really bad” under the statute, she said. But looking at each case may reveal they are not as bad, she said.
Sen. Chuck Gray, R-19, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said his primary concern is how the federal act would fit in Arizona.
“I think it is going to cost us a lot of money to do essentially what we are already doing, and that’s protecting the public,” Gray said. “Our way works fine, why should we spend the money to do what we are already doing?”
During the hearing, Sarah Tofte, a researcher with Human Rights Watch, also discussed findings of a study she authored that showed that sex offender laws across the nation, such as registration, community notification and residency restriction, are “ill-considered, poorly crafted, and may cause more harm than good.”
The report said registration laws are overbroad and overlong, and residency restrictions have forced registrants to live far from their homes and families.
Arizona has approximately 14,500 registered sex offenders, the Arizona Department of Public Safety said.