State Police checking in on Deschutes County sex offenders

Posted by Joseph Rose, The Oregonian March 05, 2008 18:19PM

Categories: Breaking News

Oregon State Police are in the middle of a compliance sweep of local sex offenders in Deschutes County, where authorities already have found 45 of 581 registered offenders out of compliance.

The sweep kicked off Friday and is expected to continue through next week, said State Police Sgt. Don Wagner.

Of the 45 sex offenders found out of compliance with registration requirements so far, 16 had active arrest warrants, seven were in custody on new charges, and 22 allegedly failing to register properly, Wagner said.

State Police currently operate and maintain a reporting database for the state's registered sex offenders. A list of offenders, both on and off supervision, is available by calling the Oregon State Police at (503) 378-3725 Ext. 44429. A list request can be sent by email to SexOffenders.Questions@state.or.us

Additional information regarding the Oregon State Police Sex Offender Registration program is available on the Departments website at http://www.oregon.gov/OSP/SOR.

Most sex offenders know their victims

Most sex offenders, including a level three offender who moved to Wadena, know their victims, said several law enforcement officials.

This statement was reiterated throughout a community notification meeting Friday. About 70 people attended the meeting to learn more about Jeffrey Scott Meagher, 44, a convicted level three sex offender who moved to Wadena.

Representatives from the Department of Corrections, Wadena Police Department, Wadena County Sheriff’s Department, Todd-Wadena Community Corrections and Wadena County Attorney’s Office were available to answer questions and provide information about Meagher and on a more general level about sex offenders in the city, county and state.

Jeffrey Scott Meagher

Michéle Murphy, representing the Minnesota Department of Corrections, provided information about Meagher.

Meagher is living on Third Street northeast in Wadena. His sexual offenses included convictions for fondling a 12-year-old female in Todd County and fondling and penetration of a 5-year-old female in Stearns County.

His court-imposed sentence expired and Meagher was released from prison on April 1, 2007. He is not under correctional supervision because his sentence has expired, Murphy said. However, he is still required to register as a sex offender. He is required to register as a predatory offender with the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension until Nov. 8, 2014, Murphy said.

“Minnesota law allows him to live in a community after completing his court imposed sentence,” she said.

“He has the right to choose where he lives. He has the right not to be harassed.”

If an offender is harassed, it is against the law. The state law that allows the public to know where sex offenders live could be revoked if there are problems with harassment, Murphy added.

Meagher is one of 53 sex offenders in Wadena County. Of the 53 in the county, 26 live in the city of Wadena.

Citizens had several questions about Meagher specifically.

One person wondered if citizens could have information about where Meagher was working and what kind of car he drove.

That information is protected, Murphy said. But law enforcement has that information so he can be monitored.

Wadena County Deputy Amy Ament monitors sex offenders in Wadena County twice a year by
taking updated pictures, checking to make sure they are living where they say they are and tracking what kind of car they drive. The county is only required to check on sex offenders once a year but Wadena County checks twice a year, said Wadena County Sheriff Mike Carr.

Some in the audience wondered why Meagher was no longer under supervision once he was assigned a level three risk level when before, he had been released as a level two offender and under supervision. Murphy explained that when he was released as a level two offender, he was under supervision because his sentence hadn’t expired yet. When he returned to prison, he completed his sentence and then was released.

People in the audience were concerned that Meagher was not under supervision and could go anywhere he wanted to, such as the swimming pool.

County Attorney Kyra Ladd told the group that during her two years as Wadena County’s prosecutor, she has charged out about two dozen criminal sexual conduct cases.

“Not a single case was the perpetrator a stranger to the victim,” she said.

The offenders were known to the victims.

“Being aware of your surroundings and who you let into your family groups and your friend groups becomes very important,” Ladd said.

Wadena Police Chief Bruce Uselman reminded those in the audience that there are others in the community who have been convicted of violent crimes. Also, there are other level one and level two sex offenders in the city of Wadena and Wadena County. Photos and information about those offenders is not available for the community to know about.

“It is nice to be able to have this available to us,” said Wadena County Sheriff Mike Carr.

“It’s a rare occasion when Mike and I can stand in front of you and say, ‘here’s a picture of a person. They’re not currently being charged with anything and they’ve served their time,’” Uselman added.

Murphy emphasized the importance of talking with kids about this.

“Get to know your children’s friends, their friend’s parents,” she said. “Know the people your children are spending time with.”

About 90 percent of sex offenders are known to their victims, she said.

At Wadena-Deer Creek Elementary School, third-graders participate in the Red Flag Green Flag program to learn about appropriate and inappropriate touches. That is another way for children to learn about this subject.

Another person asked why Meagher decided to move to Wadena.

Law enforcement weren’t allowed to say specifically why he moved to the community but said he was familiar with the area. They emphasized that he can choose where he wants to live, like anyone else.

Meagher’s timeline

1994

• Meagher is convicted of fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct, a gross misdemeanor, in Todd County. The offense involved a 12-year-old female, who knew him. Contact included fondling. Meagher received probation for this offense.

1996

• Meagher is convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, a felony. The offense involved contact with a 5-year-old female, who knew him. Contact included fondling and penetration. He used his position of authority to gain compliance. He received probation for this offense. Meagher then violated his probation and his prison sentence was executed.

2004

• Meagher is released from prison on Nov. 9, 2004. He was assigned a level two risk level and was under intensive supervised release.

2006

• On July 24, 2006, Meagher’s supervised release was revoked and he was sent back to prison. It was revoked because he had contact with minors. The contact was not physical but he wasn’t allowed to talk to children or have any contact.

2007

• On April 1, 2007, Meagher was re-released from prison and assigned a level three risk, categorized as a higher risk of re-offending. He had completed his sentence at that time and has not been under correctional supervision since then.

2008

• Meagher moves to Wadena and lives on Third Street northeast.

Residents protest "stacking" of sex offenders

Dozens of south Bakersfield residents gathered Tuesday night to talk about sex offenders living in their neighborhood.


Parents said they’re frightened and feel their area has become a dumping ground for sex offenders.


With signed petitions in hand, Jim Starkey said he’s ready for a fight.


“What is it going to be, 100, 120?” said Starkey. “How many hotel rooms do these guys have here that they think they can use?”



Starkey operates the Rosegarden Residential Care Home on Union Avenue, a facility for people with mental disabilities like Down Syndrome.


Starkey isn’t happy about his new neighbors to the north. Nine registered sex offenders moved into the El Don Motel, just feet from his facility.


”I want my employees to be safe,” said Starkey. “I want my developmentally disabled clients to be safe.”


Maria Lopez said she’s fed up with sex offenders being stacked by the dozen in motels on S. Union Avenue.


Lopez said there are three school bus stops just a couple hundred feet away from the motel.


“We were not made aware of it,” said Lopez. “We want them out of here.”


Lopez heard about our story a few weeks ago about dozens of other sex offenders paroled at the Bakersfield Lodge.


Wednesday, the Megan’s Law website said there are 31 offenders living at the Lodge, leaving Lopez to wonder if her neighborhood has become a dumping ground.


“We had neighbors tell us about the Bakersfield Lodge, and then all these others started coming out,” said Lopez.


Parole director John Bailey was out of town Wednesday, but 17 News spoke with him just a few weeks ago about the offenders living at the Bakersfield Lodge.


“When residents say, well there are 20 sex offenders living in that hotel, they can be assured that those 20 sex offenders are on electronic monitoring, that their every move is monitored 24 hours per day, 7 days per week,” Bailey said a few weeks ago.


Bailey said he’s doing his best under tight laws that limit where offenders can life.


“My high risk sex offender agents only supervise 20 people each, so there's a 1:20 ratio there,” he said.


State Sen. Dean Florez (D-Shafter) said that isn’t good enough.


He intends to pressure the Board of Supervisors to put a safe zone around the fairgrounds.


Parents at Tuesday’s rally said they would be vigilant. They’re passing around packets with pictures of the sex offenders living in the area.


Florez said he was talking with Supervisor Michael Rubio about drafting an ordinance to be introduced at an upcoming board meeting.

Sex offender law months from fixing; predators living near day cares

BY GEORGE PAWLACZYK AND BETH HUNDSDORFER

News-Democrat

An effort to fix a glitch in a state law originally intended to keep child sex offenders at least 500 feet away from home-based day cares is under way but may take a few months or more.

State Rep. James Meyer, R-Naperville, is leading the effort to repair the 2006 law, which he sponsored. "We are going to come up with a law that protects children in home day cares as soon as possible," he said.

Meyer said that by the end of next week, he hopes to have come up with a workable definition of a home day care. It will likely be one that is licensed for three or more children, he said.

The next step will be to find a suitable bill already in the legislative process and attach the revised in-home day care law definition to it, a move Meyer said would cut the length of time to get the new definition into effect.

The 2006 law's definition of a home-based day care was taken from the 1969 Child Care Act, which defined home day cares as being licensed for at least nine children.

The statute applied only to home day cares licensed for nine or more children, but none of the state's 10,080 home day cares were licensed for nine or more children. That is likely because a regulation requires that for more than eight children a helper must be hired, according to a News-Democrat investigation published Feb. 17.

The newspaper also reported that after checking 4,066 licensed in-home and commercial days cares, it found that 786 of them -- including 718 home day cares -- were in neighborhoods where at least one child sex offender lived within 500 feet.

In St. Clair and Madison Counties, 37 day cares were found with an offender living within 500 feet. In Chicago, 673 day cares, or one in four, were found to be too close to a child sex offender.

The original legislation's senate sponsor, Sen. Kirk Dillard, R-Westmont, has blamed the faulty definition on the Department of Children and Family Services, whose staffers help draft the original legislation.

DCFS licenses day cares but does not enforce the child sex offender laws. That duty falls to local police departments.

Meyer said that when the law took effect in June 2006, its sponsors didn't realize that the nine-child definition would exclude the very type of child care operation the law was meant to protect.

DCFS spokesman Kendall Marlowe has said he would have no comment on the original law or efforts to change it.

Contact reporter George Pawlaczyk at gpawlaczyk@bnd.com and 239-2625.

2 towns argue sex offender laws case

TRENTON — A state appellate court heard arguments Wednesday on ordinances that two South Jersey townships adopted to ban convicted pedophiles from living close to places where children congregate.

Lawyers for Cherry Hill and Galloway defended the sex offender residency restrictions as essential to public safety and asserted the townships' governing bodies have the power -- and the obligation -- to enact ordinances that protect their residents.

They cited statistics that show pedophiles who target girls average nearly 20 victims during their lives while those who target boys average 150 victims.

"The risk of these people reoffending and harming our children is so alarming," said Demetrios Stratis, an attorney for Galloway, Atlantic County. "I believe they are all recidivists."

But attorneys representing sex offenders fighting the Cherry Hill and Galloway ordinances and measures like them asserted the residency prohibitions ostracize offenders, which conflicts with Megan's Law, a state law aimed at protecting the public from pedophiles and rehabilitating the offenders.

They cited their own research that shows stopping sex offenders from living near schools, parks, playgrounds and day-care centers in no way decreases recidivism.

"These ordinances create an undue burden," said Lynette Siragusa, a staff attorney with Legal Services of New Jersey.

The three-judge panel led by Judge Mary Catherine Cuff heard the arguments at the Richard J. Hughes Justice Complex in Trenton. The panel said it will issue a written decision in the near future. Lawyers said a ruling would likely be released between 30 and 60 days.

The decision will affect an estimated 115 municipalities across New Jersey that have adopted sex offender ordinances. There are many more towns in the state that want to enact such ordinances, but are waiting first for the appellate court decision, Stratis said.

Superior Court Judges John McNeill in Camden County and Valerie Armstrong in Atlantic County struck down the Cherry Hill and Galloway ordinances respectively in early 2007 and ordered the townships to stop enforcing them. The measures barred sex offenders from residing within 2,500 feet of any school, park, playground or day-care center. They were subject to hefty fines, imprisonment and community service if they didn't move within 60 days of receiving a violation notice.

The Superior Court judges said Megan's Law pre-empted the local sex offender ordinances. They also stated the measures punished convicted sex offenders again for their crimes, violated their constitutional rights and treated all offenders the same regardless of their threat level to the community.

The appellate court focused most of its attention Wednesday on whether local sex offender ordinances are at odds with Megan's Law, which intends to protect the public and foster rehabilitation. Cuff, the presiding judge, questioned whether such ordinances infringe on state parole officers, who already must approve where pedophiles live and work.

"What we're basically saying is the two (Megan's Law and the ordinance) work together and are not in conflict. Their purpose is to protect the community," said Walter Kawalec III, who represented Cherry Hill.

Judge Joseph Lisa asked why the townships lumped sex offenders together rather than make case-by-case decisions as is done under Megan's Law.

"All sex offenders are at risk of being recidivists," Stratis said. "We are hereby removing the temptation so they won't re-offend."

Cuff questioned: If every municipality in New Jersey enacted such an ordinance, wouldn't that prohibit sex offenders from living in the state?

Stratis said most of the ordinances don't completely bar pedophiles from towns. For example, they can still live in one-third of Galloway, he noted.

"Effectively they are banned from Cherry Hill," countered Scott Schweiger, a public defender representing two male pedophiles fighting the ordinance. Each of the men assaulted juvenile girls. One of them assaulted a girl under 13 years of age.

Schweiger said offenders have two options in Cherry Hill: an upscale neighborhood of $400,000-plus homes and an empty field.

Frank Corrado, the lawyer for a Richard Stockton College student who can't live on campus because he was convicted of criminal sexual contact as a juvenile, said sex offender ordinances have no termination clauses. By contrast, Megan's Law makes concessions for some juvenile offenders and people who committed one sex offense and went 15 years without committing another, Corrado said.

"These individuals face imminent homelessness. They face loss of their jobs. They face displacement from their loved ones," Siragusa said of sex offenders. "They also face significant financial and emotional stress."

That argument has no validity for Lisa Kmiec, Cherry Hill's solicitor.

"It's a matter of the rights of the innocents versus the rights of the offenders," Kmiec said. "Cherry Hill will be on the side of the rights of innocents every time."

Reach Lisa Grzyboski at (856) 486-2931 or lgrzyboski@courierpostonline.com

Laws aim to bolster sex-offender registry

Annapolis (Map, News) - The man who sexually assaulted Shawn Burke when she was a teenager is expected to be released from prison in December.

But because the crime happened nearly 25 years ago in Washington County, the man won’t have to register in the state’s sex offender registry, Burke said.

“What makes this even worse is, due to a legal loophole, he will escape the sex offender registry when he is released from prison,” Burke told a Senate committee Wednesday.

Lawmakers are considering a measure aimed at closing that loophole, forcing those who committed crimes before October 1995 to register.

“We need to go back in time,” said Sen. Nancy Jacobs, a Harford County Republican, who is sponsoring the bill.

Jacob’s measure was one of several measures before the committee aimed at improving the sex offender registry.

In 2001, the General Assembly agreed to require offenders who committed a crime before 1995 to register if they were in custody in October 2001, according to Lisae Jordan, director of the Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault.

Sex crimes are often reported and go to trial years after they occurred, and a gap in the law allows offenders to evade registration, she said.

A version of the same bill passed the House last week.

Sen. Brian Frosh, a Montgomery County Democrat, is also pushing changes to the registry through a measure that would require certain juvenile sex offenders to register upon turning 21, if it is determined the person will likely commit another offense.

The bill, which Frosh also introduced last year, was prompted by a case with a mother, Michele Hunter, whose young sons were abused by a babysitter.

Because the babysitter was 13 to 15 years old at the time, he will not have register as a sex offender as an adult, Hunter said in written testimony.

The state Office of the Public Defender opposed the measure, saying it treated juveniles the same as adults, and juveniles “rarely re-offend and are highly amenable to treatment.”

The Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault suggested the bill be amended to include a range of options, such as monitoring and counseling.

smichael@baltimoreexaminer.com

Prerelease might accept sex offenders

By RICHARD ECKE
Tribune Staff Writer

State officials would like the Great Falls Prerelease Center to accept some sexual offenders at its northside facility.

Great Falls legislative candidate and westside neighborhood council member Bob Mehlhoff is up in arms over the idea.

"That's the last thing we need," said Mehlhoff. He said his council unanimously voted to oppose any plan that would place sex offenders at the center.

The Great Falls Prerelease Center houses state prison inmates, with staff members helping them find jobs and offering counseling on how to resume a normal life once they are released.

Representatives from the Montana Department of Corrections plan to attend a March 19 meeting in Great Falls that will include delegates from Great Falls' nine neighborhood councils and members of the public.

Paul Cory, the administrator of Great Falls Prerelease Services, said center officials will consider the state proposal but have not made any decisions. Traditionally, the Great Falls facility has not accepted sex offenders, while those in Billings and Missoula do. The prerelease center in Helena has begun screening some sex offenders for its program, but has not yet accepted a sex offender, a state official said.

Kerry Pribnow, the state contract manager who deals with Montana's prerelease centers, said the state would like the Great Falls facility to take certain sex offenders, if a local screening committee agrees.

"We have no ability to go in and say, 'you must take sex offenders,'" Pribnow said. He added that he believes it is safer for a community to place lower-level sex offenders in a structured prerelease setting, rather than having the state release them directly from prison.

"The alternative is $100 and a bus ticket," Pribnow said.

He said that 97 percent of criminals in the Montana State Prison will eventually be released.

"We have no way of controlling that," he said. However, the state Department of Corrections can attempt to route a number of inmates through prerelease centers, where they can find jobs, and be subject to treatment and supervision, he said.

"They're coming back to your community anyway, so how are we going to do that?" Pribnow asked. "What's the smartest way to do that?"

Mehlhoff told city commissioners earlier this week that he is alarmed by the state's plan.

"I sincerely hope that we line up against that," Mehlhoff told city officials Tuesday night. "That would be a lose-lose situation." He said he does not want to see sex offenders find jobs in Great falls and stay here.

Cory said he is willing to listen to the state's pitch on the issue.

"They have asked us for years and years and years to consider taking sex offenders," Cory said. "(The state's) position is that they're already here."

Great Falls is home to 124 registered sex offenders, according to a state government Web site that lists violent and sexual offenders in Montana. The two cities where sex offenders are accepted into prerelease, Billings and Missoula, are home to the highest number of registered sex offenders in the state. According to the Web site, Billings has 267 registered sex offenders and Missoula has 238.

Those two cities and Great Falls top the state in the number of registered sex offenders; Kalispell has 93, Helena and Butte each have 66, Bozeman has 51 and Havre is home to 14 registered sex offenders, according to the Web site.

Pribnow said he doesn't believe the number of registered sex offenders living in Billings and Missoula is affected by the fact the prerelease centers there accept sexual offenders.

"It's very rare that Missoula and Billings take offenders from out of their jurisdictions," Pribnow said.

He added that the Great Falls Prerelease Center would not be asked to accept Tier 3 sex offenders, which means the court has deemed those people to be at a high risk to reoffend.

Pribnow said studies have shown the worst sex offenders, including pedophiles and serial offenders, are difficult to treat. However, he said sex offenders in the two lower categories, Tiers 1 and 2, might respond better to treatment. He noted that a methamphetamine user might convict a sex crime because the drug can act as a sexual stimulant.

"It doesn't mean that they're serial sex offenders," Pribnow said. "It means they're meth addicts."

Montana has prerelease centers in Butte, Billings, Bozeman, Great Falls, Missoula and Helena, he said.

If the Great Falls facility agrees to the state's proposal, it would be asked to screen Tier 1 or Tier 2 sex offenders who commit crimes in northcentral Montana for possible placement at the center, Pribnow said. He added that sex offenders from outside the area would not be sent to the Great Falls center.

Pribnow said a limited amount of state money would be available to Great Falls to electronically monitor certain hard-to-place sex offenders. The monitoring would not be available for minor offenders, he said.

Reach Tribune Staff Writer Richard Ecke at recke@greatfallstribune.com, or at 406-791-1467 or 800-438-6600.