Sunday, June 17, 2012

Do you believe Tiers and Levels have the same meaning and purpose?

TRUTH: No, Proof follows:

No, tiers and levels have different meanings and serve different purposes.

Traditional Risk Assessments:
Compared to clinical methods, actuarial risk instruments are a preferred method to discern sex offenders risk for sexual as well as violent recidivism because, unlike clinical practices, they are considered inexpensive, objective and modestly accurate. Scientists argue that risk instruments that employ only static, or historic measures of offender characteristics, rather than dynamic, are certainly sufficient for the purposes of gauging individuals’ likelihood of recidivism. See Sex Offender Risk Assessment Institute of Public Policy Truman School of Public Affairs University of Missouri – Columbia

Risk assessment systems result in defining "Levels" of risk:
Level 1 (low risk of repeat offense), or

Level 2 (moderate risk of repeat offense), or

Level 3 (high risk of repeat offense and a threat to public safety exists).
See NY Risk Level & Designation Determination
All traditional risk assessment systems will use words like, risk, assessment, dangerousness, recidivism etc. which defines their intended purpose. The result of these assessments are levels of risk likelihood of recidivism, clearly defined.

However, under the Adam Walsh Act we find something never before heard of in history. A tier assignment system, a wolf in sheep's clothing, without any stated intent of risk assessment, in fact, its stated intent is otherwise.

SORNA's Tier Assignment System (TAS): Everything you thought you knew is about to change, truths revealed, this is an expose of its real -but hidden- purpose. It is cunning, devious, cruel, and genius at the same time; its real purpose is not what it seems.

SORNA does not use these words "classification, risk, dangerousness, punishment or 'offense based'" in its discussion of tiers! Accordingly, tier assignment purpose has to be other than flagging registrants as dangerous or a risk. Right?
In SORNA it clearly says, tier assignment is used to inform registrants when they are required to verify their information, in person(42 USC 16915(a)), and their term of registration (42 USC 16916).

So why does the public need to know something, whose only purpose is, to tell registrants when to do their verification and for how long? Registrants' tier levels have no public safety value?
Public Perception of Tiers: There is no doubt the SORNA/TAS system is a risk based classification system of a devious kind, a wolf in sheep's clothing, resulting in a dangerousness rating, even though certain words are purposely omitted from SORNA discussion on tiers. Historically the public has been primed to believe "Levels" meant levels of dangerousness, because of states that have/had traditional risk assessment systems (which arrive at dangerousness levels of 1-2-3, meaning likelihood of re-offense). Now with the coming of SORNA/TAS tiers and all the political and media hype, tiers are now believed to have the same meaning and purpose as levels. Levels 1-2-3 = Tiers I-II-II.
In a recent news article Target 8 News had this to say:

"One of ___' rape victims says he's dangerous and belongs on the list as a predator, though she'd rather see his name in an obituary. But there is nothing on the registry that actually says Tier 3 is the most dangerous. That's something you have to figure out for yourself." "Michigan sex offender tiers confusing" (5-8-12 by Ken Kolker)
Here we see a law firm believing -tiers mean dangerousness-:

Michigan law calls for sex offenders to be registered in three tiers, based on the crime committed, their risk of reoffending and their perceived danger to the public. For example, Level 1 offenders have a low risk of committing future crimes and pose a minimal public safety risk. Each tier has different requirements, particularly concerning registration and reporting.

All offenders must report, in person, to law enforcement officers on a scheduled basis. Level 3 offenders have the most rigorous reporting schedule. They must report during the first 15 days of the months of October, July, April and January in order to confirm their addresses. Level 2 offenders must report in January and July, while Level 1 offenders must report once a year in January.

Offenders convicted of a Level 3 offense are required to register as a sex offender for the rest of their lives. Level 2 offenders must register for 25 years, and Level 1 for 15 years. Registry Reporting Requirements for Michigan Sex Offenders (6-17-12 by Garton & Vogt, P.C.)
SORNA/TAS does not command lawmakers or others to explain the real meaning and purpose of Tiers, as it is written into SORNA (a system of notifying registrants when they are to report to verify their information (42 USC 16915(a)), and their term of registration (42 USC 16916)).
Absent from SORNA is any command to show the tier level on the public registry, in fact, SORNA only requires "The jurisdiction shall maintain the Internet site in a manner that will permit the public to obtain relevant information for each sex offender ..." 42 USC 16918(a) and as to the National Sex Offender public registry "The Website shall allow the public to obtain relevant information for each sex offender ..." 42 USC 16920(b).
Given the SORNA stated purpose of "tiers" why is that information not exempted from the public registry? It is quite apparent that Lawmakers want the public misconstruction to continue. Why?
Because it suits the hidden purpose of further punishing registrants, by the community where registrants live, work and go to school, without lawmakers saying, that is what TAS was designed to do. Think about it, why does the public need to know about tiers, if their purpose pertains only to something the registrant needs to do at specified times?
And, until you fully analyze SORNA/TAS and its -intended effects- you will not see this subtle and onerous gotcha system. The gotcha is, that, Lawmakers through TAS do not inflict further punishment, TAS is DESIGNED so that registrants are further punished by the community where registrants live, work and go to school. It took genius (many legal minds) to design this gotcha system, and TAS also effectively TAKES AWAY from registrants, and public view, registrants' efforts at rehabilitation during serving of their sentences. This places registrants in a PERPETUAL FALSE LIGHT before the public eye, many for the rest of their lives; if that isn't further punishment, nothing is.

Tiers and levels have different meanings and purpose, need more be said...

For now have a great day and a better tomorrow.
eAdvocate