Select Page

It is hardly news that convicted sex predators—especially those who prey on young people and women— occupy the lowest rung of society.  This is not surprising; even among their fellow felons, who themselves are regarded as second-class citizens, sex predators are frequently stigmatized as an underclass within the notoriously hierarchical prison systems.  And, when it comes time for a sex-offender to leave jail and return to the public, the individual’s would be neighbors often protest, leaving authorities baffled as to where to place these pariahs.  Indeed, even the rare judicial opinion that is sympathetic to sex offenders will go to great lengths to emphasize how heinous and despicable their crimes are.

The social stigmatization and moral opprobrium associated with sex crimes manifested itself in the legal system when, in the 1990s, state legislators became enamored with sexually violent predator (SVP) laws.  SVP laws essentially were enacted to prevent already-convicted sex predator felons from actually being released to the outside world.  The laws were not “punishment” for crimes already committed, because that would violate the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause.  Instead, the laws took a different tack by basing continued incarceration on the offender’s potential for future behavior.  SVP laws were, therefore, styled as a civil commitment statute, which operates under the premise that some people are simply too dangerous to be free, even if they have already served their sentence.  Under the SVP laws, once the offender’s prison term was completed, the individual would be re-tried in a civil suit under the authority of the new SVP law; if found to be dangerous, the offender would continue to be held in the state’’s custody. . . .