The five things you need to know about the National Sex Offender Registry

A not-so-secret briefing note

by Michael Friscolanti on Friday, April 24, 2009 6:50am - 7 Comments

The five things you need to know about the National Sex Offender RegistryWhen Christopher Stephenson was a young boy—before he was kidnapped, sexually assaulted and murdered by a notorious pedophile—his father would often tuck him into bed with a classic fairy tale: The Emperor’s New Clothes. A well-known children’s book, it tells the story of a pompous but gullible monarch who mistakenly hires two swindlers to revamp his kingly wardrobe. The result? The con men convince the emperor that they have discovered a gorgeous—but invisible—new material, and then promptly parade him around town in his latest “clothes.”

In Ottawa yesterday, as Christopher’s dad testified in front of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, he used that fictional fable to illustrate a very real point. “Mr. Chair, committee members,” said Jim Stephenson, sitting beside his wife, Anna. “In its present form, the [national sex offender registry] has no clothes, either. It is dysfunctional, and fails to properly protect Canadians from becoming victims.”

Sadly, Jim Stephenson is hardly the first person to criticize the fairy tale state of our sex-offender registry. The database has been described as everything from “a national embarrassment” to something straight out of a “Monty Python skit,” and a series of Maclean’s investigations uncovered a horribly broken system crippled by weak legislation, archaic technology and an utter lack of political will. But for the first time since the database was launched in 2004—and more than two years after the law mandated a Parliamentary review—MPs are finally taking a close look at the litany of problems plaguing the registry.

For two days (four hours in all) the Public Safety Committee heard from a variety of expert witnesses, from bureaucrats to police officers to privacy advocates. There was news (in five years, the registry has not solved a single crime). There was honesty (some offenders are “falling through the cracks,” said a senior RCMP officer). And, of course, there was the inevitable politicking (Conservative ministers repeatedly lamented the fact that Jean Chrétien’s Liberals didn’t foresee all these obvious problems when they first introduced the registry). However, it was Brydie Bethell, representing the Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers, who summed it up best. “This is not an easy issue,” she said. “This issue strikes at the core of our hearts, as human beings and as parents.”

Peter Van Loan, the Public Safety Minister, assured reporters this week that Stephen Harper’s government is already “consulting” with stakeholders and considering amendments that would toughen up the registry. (Of course, his predecessor, Stockwell Day, said the exact same thing—and nothing happened). Adding to the endless consultations, the parliamentary committee must now prepare yet another report for the government, including a series of specific recommendations. Until then, here are five essential things that they must consider:

1) HOW WE GOT HERE
Christopher Stephenson was 11 years old when Joseph Fredericks, a convicted child molester with a heinous criminal record, abducted the young boy from a Brampton, Ont., shopping mall on Father’s Day weekend, 1988. Fredericks kept Christopher alive for 36 hours and assaulted him repeatedly before slitting his throat and dumping his body. A coroner’s jury later concluded that if police had access to an electronic registry of known sex offenders living in the neighbourhood, detectives might have knocked on Fredericks’ door while the boy was still alive. As Jim Stephenson testified today: “There would have been a very definite, different outcome. You talk about time being of the essence in an investigation like that? Police were on the scene within about three minutes of Christopher’s abduction. They responded very quickly, but did not have much information to go on. They had no information on sex offenders who were living in the community.”

Ontario, under then-Premier Mike Harris, launched a provincial sex offender registry in April 2001 (eight years ago this week). It’s called Christopher’s Law, in honour of Jim and Anna’s son. Anyone in the province convicted of a sex offence is automatically added to the database, and among the “state-of-the-art” features is a geo-mapping function that can pinpoint the names and addresses of every registered rapist and pedophile who lives near a crime scene. Harris offered Ontario’s software to the Chrétien government free of charge, but for a long time, the feds weren’t interested. And when Ottawa—under increasing pressure from provincial governments—finally did decide to build a nationwide sex offender registry, they didn’t want Ontario’s help. Instead, the federal Liberals ordered the RCMP to build a completely new system from scratch. Many of the current shortcomings can be traced back to that single decision.

Bookmark and Share
  • sheepleherder

    I see Canada is starting to make some of the same mistakes the US has made. We have almost 700,000 people on our registry and it is public and has caused untold damage to many people’s lives as well as their wives and children. Not a single case has been solved in my country and teenagers that send nude pics to their friends are the fastest growing segment of the RSO population. The sad truth is you cannot prevent crime by passing a law and these registries are extremely counter productive.

  • robert

    Brilliant! The one reply comes from outside the country and it nails the SOR to the wall!
    This is another very scary step into a world of a police state. Better we should castrate half the boys and 10% of girls at birth.

  • iris

    Castrating won't solve this, because it is about power and control.It has been done, men insisted, and they still wanted to do it.

  • betonit

    we the general public need to know exactly where these offenders are living, what they are doing, who they live with. where they shop everything there is to know they should no rights after molesting a child! i dont even think they should allowed to vote .ifn fact a special molesters tatoo on the face would be just fine with most parents in this country!

    • Jennifer

      Hi betonit

      You are correct; our children's right must come before the offenders. And we as parents have a right to be able to protect our children. Information is key. Knowledge is power. Keep up the good work betonit!!

  • http://yourblogzone.com/consultant365 Thomas Finnerty

    Information is necessary for effective action. The more reliable and accessible: the more effective. Systems are not perfect. Our governments,yours and mine, are not perfect. They are among the best, though, and are so because we endeavor to what we can. Provide the tools and the job will get done. There are myriad flaws in the system of registration in my own state, MA, USA. Your article touches on all of them. The salient point is also made: The requirement reduces the recurrence in the greatest number. There then is focus. One other factor should be in your consideration. An informed populus is an empowered populus. Their vigilance can then enter the equation of prevention. It is happening here.

  • Valerie Evans

    I`m so upset! This makes me sick! First of all, A sex offenders should not have any rights at all. Its our responsibility to look out for children, I would slap their picture up every were. And i think if the system can`t keep up, Or they can`t do their job in the responsibility in protecting thousands children, I think they should line the sex offenders up and cut of their " you know what" See i don`t care what the law when it comes to this. I say put all the sex offenders on a island and feed them dog food. I will pay extra taxs dallars for that! So there it is my opinon.

From Macleans