Projo 7 to 7 News Blog

PROVIDENCE, R.I. -- A bill that would make it a felony in Rhode Island for a convicted child molester to knowingly enter a playground, day-care center or school is either a needed protection for children or a constitutional quagmire that misses the real problem.

That's how the debate played out before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. The bill's sponsor, Rep. Nicholas A. Mattiello, D-Cranston, enlisted recent controversy over Cranston's Harrington Hall homeless shelter on Howard Street, where sex offenders were staying, roughly a quarter-mile from the Brayton Park playground and a half-mile from a school.

"There is no reason compelling enough to allow these types of individuals" to have potential to be around children in the three kinds of locations, Mattiello testified for the bill, which would apply to those convicted of first-degree or second-degree child molestation. First- and second-degree molesters are required to register as sex offenders.

Some committee members posed scenarios that might raise constitutional questions. Suppose someone with a second-degree molestation conviction in the distant past plays on an adult softball team in an area where there is a playground? Rep. J. Patrick O'Neill, D-Pawtucket, asked.

Mattiello said the person should not be allowed there and therefore could not play on that field.

"You know what, these people have been found guilty," added another panel member, Rep. Peter G. Palumbo, D-Cranston, so that may mean they "can no longer play baseball." He went on to say that it's time to "stop worrying about the rights of sex offenders" and to err on the side of caution for children.

Steven Brown, executive director of the Rhode Island affiliate of the ACLU, testified against the bill, saying it will not protect children because it "focuses on the wrong problem." Statistics shows it is most often a family member, not a stranger on the street, who molests a child, Brown asserted. He said the proposal also raises a host of constitutional questions.

Committee member Rep. Roberto DaSilva, D-East Providence, said that the bill could run into problems on the House floor without some language tweaking. There could be instances where a person "may have turned his life around," said DaSilva, a police officer who said he supports the bill.

Mattiello said he believes that sex offenders who turn their lives around are in "the overwhelming minority." He added that he would be open to language making an exception for when a school is used as a polling place.

Reps. Rodney Driver, D-Richmond, and Edith H. Ajello, D-Providence, foresaw situations where someone who has turned things around could be banned from attending any school events involving his or her child.

A father "couldn't go to the graduation of his son?" Ajello asked.

"Could not," said Mattiello.

The bill is now slated for the committee's vote on Thursday. It is one of several proposals this session dealing with sex offenders -- bills getting attention amid media reports about Harrington Hall. The state has hired a different agency to run the shelter, dropping a practice in which convicted sex offenders had places set aside for them to sleep there, the Journal has reported. Sex offenders will not be turned away if they arrive seeking a place to stay, but the shelter will not reserve space.

 Tags  Cranston RI General Assembly Providence RI sex offender

Comments

Elizabeth said:

The ACLU will be all over this, as they should, but this time I don't agree with them simply on practical grounds. Matiello is right: Sex offenders have an extremely low rehab rate and a very high rate of re-offending. The only true "cures" I've read about involve drastic physical intervention such as castration. I do feel bad for convicted offenders who serve their time and wish to rejoin family and community activities where children are present, but I could never, ever conclude that it's safe for them to do so. The safety of the young and vulnerable must take precedence over the offenders' pleasure, even when it seems unfair. At least, IMO.

Link | June 24, 2009 10:28 AM
Report Abuse

---

Tim said:

The comment is wrong! The facts are that sex offenders have one of the LOWEST recidivism rates amoung most criminals. The US Dept. of Justice showes the reconviction rate of released sex offenders at 3.5% within 3 years of release from prison. After being in Law Enforcement for 25 years and working with these laws I can tell you for the most part they do NOT protect anyone. They give the public the wrong idea as to who is commiting sex crimes. The DOJ study showed that 95% of sexual assaults are commited by a person with NO prior arrest record. Over 90% of sexual assaults are commited by a person well known and trusted by the victim with over 50% of those being a family member. That laws such as this one being written do noting at all and may even make the public and childern at a greater risk. Smoke and mirrors do not get it anymore it is time for the turth.

Link | June 24, 2009 1:32 PM
Report Abuse

---

Leave a comment

Please be civil. Vicious comments, personal attacks and profanity won't be published. Name and email are required; email address will not publish.

Name:

Email:

URL:  

Remember personal info?

Captcha:

Type the characters you see in the picture above.