Continued punishment

The media outcry that a homeless, high-risk convicted sex offender had relocated to downtown Portland caused a community response that drove the man out of town. Shunning a person after he’s completed his sentence may constitute a type of punishment that exists beyond the justice system, and one that prevents him from reintegrating into society.

On Jan. 11, I got an email from a friend with a link to a news report warning about a homeless convicted sex offender Gordon Michael Strauss, who had recently registered in my neighborhood. Later in the day I got a text message from someone else. Then a Facebook message. And then another one. Then another email. A former teacher of mine at Lincoln High School forwarded me the email sent out to parents warning them of the same man. Apparently, similar messages were sent out to the parents of students at St. Mary’s Academy and the Metropolitan Learning Center. The news went viral.

The police officer interviewed on local news channels about Strauss’ release said she would “print [Strauss’ picture] out, and have it in my pocket, and learn it like the back of my hand and, quite frankly, if you see the man, go the other way.” She profiled his “typical attack.” She said his pattern of behavior indicated that there was “no indication…that he is going to stop.” The spread of information of Strauss’ relocation to my neighborhood happened very quickly, and there was no downplaying of the possibility that he could reoffend.

Strauss registered “at the corner of Northwest Ninth Avenue and Lovejoy Street,” according to the police. And while my first thought was that he was registered at the building on that street corner, I recalled that he was homeless and that there’s very little on that particular street corner; also, there aren’t any shelters.

Oregon law differs from many other states in that it allows sex offenders to register without a permanent domicile. In fact, he’s in compliance of the law if he sleeps anywhere within a seven to 10 block radius of where he’s registered. Furthermore, Oregon only requires registered sex offenders to check in yearly (in contrast, Seattle requires weekly check-ins). There are more than 300 homeless registered sex offenders living in Portland.

All 50 states enforce some variation of Megan’s Law, which requires convicted sex offenders to register with police and requires public notification of information pertaining to those sex offenders. This is what led to the media releasing Strauss’ name and information about his location.

On Jan. 18, Strauss took his name off the registry in Portland so he could relocate back to Seattle, apparently to be closer to his family. However, this news garnered only a fraction of the press his registration did. He informed police that all the attention about his release was the reason he’d decided to leave the city. In effect, the flood of attention had pushed him out.

A 2008 study by the New Jersey Department of Corrections found that, in New Jersey, Megan’s Law has had almost no effect on
anything, really. According to the report, “Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses.”

What about what just happened with Strauss in Portland? It appears that the sheer amount of media attention is responsible for driving Strauss out of town, but that’s directly tied to the release of information on his whereabouts.

While I am certainly glad Strauss no longer lives in my area, I cannot help but wonder about the effects of shunning him further. The police make it seem as if he’s only on the street until his next offense puts him back in an institution. For someone like Strauss, reintegration into society may never be possible.

Strauss was sentenced to 14 years in an institution for sexual psychopaths after his most recent offense, and he completed that sentence. Yet on his release a new type of punishment exists, one that prevents him from reintegrating into society. As a society we have decided that serious sexual offenses almost ensure that you can’t successfully reincorporate into a community, regardless of whether it’s actually possible to do so in practice.

Megan’s Law, according to the New Jersey Department of Corrections, may not cause any drastic changes in criminal behavior, but if these last weeks are any proof, they certainly raise community awareness. Perhaps even to the point of perpetuating a punishment that reaches far beyond the confines of a corrections facility.