Failure to Register as a Sex Offender: Is it Associated with Recidivism?

Levenson, Jill S.; Letourneau, Elizabeth J.; Armstrong, Kevin; Zgoba, Kristen M.

doi:10.1080/07418820902972399

Cited by 51 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Having a current or prior FTR conviction, however, did not significantly increase the risk of sexual recidivism. Consistent with the results reported by Levenson et al (2009), this finding does not support the notion that registration noncompliance elevates the risk of sexual reoffending. Yet contrary to the results reported by Levenson and colleagues, we did not find that an FTR conviction significantly increased the risk of general recidivism.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

“…A common assumption, then, is that registration noncompliant offenders pose a serious threat to public safety because they are seemingly attempting to avoid scrutiny and detection (Levenson, Letourneau, Armstrong, & Zgoba, 2009). To date, however, only two studies have examined whether registration noncompliance is associated with future criminal offending.…”

Section: Previous Research On Sormentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effects of Failure to Register on Sex Offender Recidivism

Duwe

Donnay

2010

Criminal Justice and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Failure to register (FTR) as a predatory offender recently supplanted criminal sexual conduct as the most common recidivism offense for sex offenders released from Minnesota prisons. To date, however, little is known about FTR. The authors attempted to address this gap by examining recidivism outcomes among inmates required to register as predatory offenders who were released from Minnesota prisons between 2000 and 2004. In particular, they analyzed whether an FTR offense (or history of any FTR offense) had a significant impact on sexual, general, and FTR recidivism. To minimize observed differences between FTR and non-FTR offenders, propensity score matching was used to create the non-FTR comparison group. Results from the Cox regression models indicate that an FTR offense did not have a significant effect on either sexual or general recidivism. In contrast, the findings suggested that an FTR conviction significantly increased the risk of recidivism for another FTR offense. Moreover, the results indicated that offenders with at least a GED or high school diploma at the time of release had a significantly reduced risk of FTR recidivism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Section: Previous Research On Sormentioning

confidence: 96%

The Effects of Failure to Register on Sex Offender Recidivism

Duwe

Donnay

2010

Criminal Justice and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This lack of compliance could very well result from a rational assessment of the inability of a parole or probation department to effectively supervise sex offenders and monitor noncompliance. Some researchers have noted that approximately 16 percent of all convicted sex offenders required to register in the United States are noncompliant and thus essentially missing (Levenson et al 2010). The persistent location of some offenders in restricted areas might also reflect the difficulty of locating employment, accessing treatment, and maintaining important social contacts in unrestricted areas, which tend to be more rural in nature than restricted housing areas, which are usually found in dense, urban neighborhoods (Zandbergen and Hart 2006;Chajewski and Mercado 2009;Socia 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Sex Offender Residential Movement Patterns: A Markov Chain Analysis

Rey

Murray

Grubesic

et al. 2013

The Professional Geographer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There is also little empirical support for the idea that registration non-compliant offenders pose a serious threat to public safety because they are seemingly attempting to avoid scrutiny and detection (Levenson, Letourneau, Armstrong, & Zgoba, 2010). In 2006, Barnoski examined the relationship between FTR as a sex offender and subsequent recidivism among those required to register in the State of Washington between 1990 and 1999.…”

Section: Predatory Offender Registrationmentioning

confidence: 98%

What has worked and what has not with Minnesota sex offenders: a review of the evidence

Duwe

2014

Journal of Sexual Aggression

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the early 1990s, many states in the USA have attempted to control sexual offending and, more narrowly, sexual recidivism by implementing longer prison sentences for sex crimes, sex offender registration and notification, residency restrictions, involuntary civil commitment and lifetime probation and parole. The early 1990s also marked the beginning of a decline in official rates of sexual offending, including sexual recidivism. This study reviews recent research conducted on Minnesota sex offenders in an effort to identify which policies, programmes and practices might have contributed to the drop in sexual recidivism rates that have been observed over the last few decades. By assessing what has, and has not, worked with Minnesota sex offenders, this study discusses how lessons learned from the Minnesota experience may apply to broader efforts within the USA and abroad to control sexual offending.

show abstract

Failure to Register as a Sex Offender: Is it Associated with Recidivism?

Cited by 51 publications

References 33 publications

The Effects of Failure to Register on Sex Offender Recidivism

The Effects of Failure to Register on Sex Offender Recidivism

Sex Offender Residential Movement Patterns: A Markov Chain Analysis

What has worked and what has not with Minnesota sex offenders: a review of the evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About