Matthew T. Mangino
The Youngstown Vindicator
September 24, 2017
How much is too much? Ma’lik Richmond must be asking himself
that very question. The on-again, off-again Youngstown State University
football player is embroiled in a controversy of his own making.
Richmond served about 10 months in a juvenile detention
facility after he and a high-school teammate were convicted in 2013 of raping a
16-year-old girl.
In January, he joined the YSU football team as a
nonscholarship walk-on. In August, Richmond was informed by university
officials that he would be required to sit-out a season.
He filed suit against the university, and a federal judge
granted him a temporary injunction. He played against Central Connecticut State
University on Sept. 16. A hearing on a permanent injunction is scheduled for
Thursday.
Prison population
Richmond was convicted of a horrible crime. People charged
with sex offenses are the most rapidly increasing segment of the U.S. prison
population, according to Marie Gottschalk, a professor of political science at
the University of Pennsylvania. Politicians and the general public talk about
sex offenders in terms of danger, deviance and pathological pariahs. In some
instances that may be warranted, particularly with regard to offenses against children.
Gottschalk said during a recent interview, “According to the
latest statistics on federal prosecutions, we are meting out longer sentences
on average to people who view child pornography than to people who actually
sexually abuse children.”
To use a football metaphor lawmakers across the country keep
“piling on” convicted sex offenders.
Just last week, I wrote for GateHouse Media about the
proliferation of onerous sentences and ever-longer registration requirements
being fueled, in part, by an assertion in a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2002
wherein Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote that the recidivism rate for sex
offenders was about 80 percent.
According to Reason magazine, there was never any evidence
to support the assertion, and research conducted during the period within which
it proliferated indicated that it was not even remotely true. “Nearly every
study – including those by states as diverse as Alaska, Nebraska, Maine, New
York and California as well as an extremely broad one by the federal government
that followed every offender released in the United States for three years –
has put the three-year recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders in the low
single digits, with the bulk of the results clustering around 3.5 percent.”
If fact, in some states–including Pennsylvania and Ohio – a
sex offender can be detained after completing his or her sentence. The process
is called civil commitment. Nearly 5,400 people are currently civilly committed
in sexually violent predator programs in 20 states and by the federal Bureau of
Prisons. According to The Marshall Project, 13 states allow this practice for
people who committed their crimes as juveniles.
All 50 states and Washington, D.C., have developed
sex-offender registries. More than 800,000 people in the U.S. are registered
sex offenders.
Registries
While civil commitment and sex-offender registries are
perhaps the most extreme examples of “civil” punishment tagged on at the
conclusion of the “criminal” punishment imposed on people convicted of sex
crimes, they are by no means the only tag -ons.
Driven by a pervasive fear of sexual predators, and facing
no discernible opposition, according to the New York Times, “politicians have
become ever more inventive in dreaming up ways to corral and marginalize those
convicted of a sex related crime.”
As Richmond now knows, marginalizing former offenders is not
exclusively for politicians.
Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett,
Kelly & George P.C. His book “The Executioner’s Toll, 2010” was released by
McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him
on Twitter @MatthewTMangino.
To visit the column CLICK HERE
1 comment:
Though it may seem as though sex offenders are being treated unfairly, it is difficult to draw the line and say "this is excessive" punishment for whatever the accused has done especially when it is in a situation such as rape. What may seem as "excessive punishment" to some may seem as "not enough" for the victims or those affected.
Post a Comment