Panel OKs exam changes for released sex offenders
Endorsed policy includes two more tests to assess behavior risk
10:59 PM CDT on Friday, July 6, 2007

By EMILY RAMSHAW / The Dallas Morning News
eramshaw@dallasnews.com
AUSTIN � A state panel voted unanimously Friday to change the risk assessment tests to rank sex criminals being released from prison, replacing a flawed system known to overpenalize young, low-level offenders and let some of the worst slide through unscathed.

The classification system won't apply to registered sex offenders already living in the community, but members of the Texas Council on Sex Offender Treatment said they wanted to let these offenders be retested down the road � to lower their risk levels or, in some cases, be removed from the registry.

"I like the incentive of being able to reduce your risk, even to deregister," said Dr. Glen Allen Kercher, who serves on the board.

That sentiment isn't likely to be politically palatable, though; with 45,000 registered sex offenders in Texas, House Corrections Committee Chairman Jerry Madden � one of the state's most rehabilitation-friendly Republicans � already has said he thinks revisiting existing classifications is impossible.

Other hard-line crime fighters, such as Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley, even disagree with Mr. Madden's push for broader risk assessment testing.

"What these social scientists are still experimenting with and believing is that they have some magic test they can give someone and somehow do a better job of predicting future behavior," Mr. Bradley said. "These tests are a big waste of time and money. They favor the defendant and reduce public safety."

The policy the council endorsed Friday calls for sex offenders being freed from prison to undergo a series of tests, as opposed to the single 10-question test offenders have taken since the 1990s.

That original test � the Static 99 � now will be used with two other assessments to assign risk levels to sex offenders and determine which ones must go public with their crimes.

While the Static 99 still is considered the most accurate for determining the risk of sexual recidivism, the two other tests will gauge how likely an offender is to engage in nonsexual violent crime, and what kind of supervision the offender requires.

The corresponding risk levels will determine which sex offenders are so dangerous they must have postcards listing their crime and characteristics mailed to new neighbors every time they move.

Board members said that they need more time to devise a system for blending the results of the three tests and for making sure they accurately reflect the risk of women and juveniles.

They're also considering assessing a fourth test, one year after release for paroled offenders. Allison Taylor, executive director of the council, said she expects the new tests to be used as soon as the Texas Department of Criminal Justice trains employees to administer them.

If these new tests are so great, why don't we have everyone take one before they get caught molesting children?

I think these kinds of tests are stupid simply because they basically rely upon the self-report of the offender. Any person with half a brain realizes that these tests punish honesty; therefore, it is in the offender's best interests to lie as much as they can get away with.

At least with the MMPI you have plenty of questions so you can hopefully weed-out the dishonest answers.

But even so, people are far to complicated to allow for a simple "test" to determine whether or not they are going to be "good" people. These kinds of tests are just measures designed to make people feel good, that they are really accomplishing something when, in fact, its all BS.

How does one become less of a risk? We prosecuted a juvenile sex offender who told us after sex offender treatment that he had 21 victims--both genders, range of ages, and all were forced sexual acts. We prosecuted him for the 2 we knew about. I'm worried that these offenders learn how better to avoid detection, not to avoid reoffending.

If a person has shown a propensity to rape a child by doing it at least once in the past, the risk does not decrease because the offender has managed to control powerful and sick impulses for fear of being caught. In fact, if the fear of being caught was lessened, as in the offender was suddenly treated as less of a risk, then it seems likely that the offender would be even more dangerous--less reason to curb those impulses!

I played with a Static 99 and an Abel Assessment in a sentencing - got the defense "expert" to agree that both are highly manipulable. Good experts will tell you Abel should NOT be used in Court, and will admit that the Static 99 excludes way too much information. If you look at NIMH stats, a predator has 50 girls (or 150 boys) before being caught. Of course, one of the biggest problems is that the Static 99 does NOT deal at all with the predator's impact on the victim, his remorse (or lack thereof), how many charges he COULD face (known but unindicted cases), etc., etc., etc. One therapist told me the most accurate test was a polygraph, because these guys are usually smart and can manipulate any test, the testers and tests exclude relevant information, and that, unless totally sociopathic, a perv can't lie on a poly. If you look at BJS stats, there is a HUGE difference among experts on recidivism.
It is all voodoo, if you ask me.

I like the ROPE test.

You String a rope around the molestor's neck and drop him through a trap door. If the rope is strong enough the molestor never reoffends.

It's the Rid Ourselves of Predators Evermore test.

We had a sex offender who was on probation and who was regularly polygraphed. He always passed his polygraph test, and always said he was not messing with little girls. But, in fact, he had molested a little girl.

I have no idea if he was a psychopath, but if the polygraph is the best we have, we don't have much.

Still, I do believe that there are many non-sexual predators who are required to register as sex offenders. Teenagers who have consensual sex with other teenagers are usually not sex predators and should not be lumped in with dangerous sex perverts.

How recent must the psychological test be to be considered accurate?

Depends on who you talk to. Sex Offender therapists will dispute it, but the consensus among most in the field is that a pedophile is always a pedophile. The most you can hope for is behavior modification.