Citation

Mogavero MC, Kennedy LW. Vict. Offender 2017; 12(3): 401-433.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/15564886.2015.1084962

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The development of sex offender residence restriction legislation was predicated on the assumption that sex offenders pose an increased risk to the public. The goal of such legislation was to create "sex-offender-free" zones in an effort to decrease sex offenders' access to potential victims. Such legislation prohibits registered sex offenders from residing near landmarks where children are known to congregate. Empirical evidence thus far has failed to demonstrate that residing near these landmarks contributes to sex offenders' ability to access victims, and may actually be doing more harm than good. The current study questions the rationale behind the implementation of residence restrictions and if this rationale is consistent with the realities of victim selection and sexual offending among incarcerated sex offenders. The sample consisted of 270 males incarcerated in a New Jersey correctional facility. The results demonstrate that most sex offenders resided within a 2,500-foot restricted landmark zone. However, after examining the methods sex offenders used and examining how far they traveled to meet or establish contact with their victims, residing near restricted landmarks did not contribute to victim selection. Of the 270 sex offenders, the offense patterns consistent with many residence restrictions were applicable to less than 1%.

Language: en

Keywords

sex offenders; residence restrictions; sex offender policy