You may not have heard of the Model Penal Code, but it affects most of our lives. It was first published in 1962 by the American Law Institute, an independent organization made up of thousands of lawyers, judges, and academics, with the goal of encouraging U.S. states to standardize their criminal codes. Although not legally binding, the Model Penal Code has had a great deal of influence as a majority of States have adopted it in whole or in part. The current review, which has been in the works for nearly a decade, will push states to update their laws based on the knowledge we have gained over the past 60 years. Among the most serious crimes against offenders recorded is the case of Patrick Drum, who shot and killed two men in 2012 because they were on Washington`s sex offender registry.  Jeremy and Christine Moody, two self-proclaimed neo-Nazis, were convicted of kidnapping and murder in 2014 when they forced a registered sex offender and his wife to enter their home at gunpoint and then execute him.  Stephen Marshall, after killing two registered criminals in Maine, committed suicide when he was cornered by police on a bus. The American Law Institute did just that.
He has reviewed decades of research, interviewed numerous experts, and made thoughtful and empirically sound policy recommendations. But not everyone is happy. The ALI had originally planned to finally approve the revisions at a council meeting in mid-January. In the days leading up to the vote, however, she received letters opposing empirically grounded recommendations for change from key stakeholders: the U.S. Department of Justice (which oversees state and other jurisdictions` compliance with federal registration requirements), the National Association of State Attorneys General, and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The letters mainly target provisions relating to sex trafficking and denial of public access to sex offence registers, with the proposal to exclude children from registration only marginally mentioned – although the National Association of Attorneys General explicitly refers to the recommendation to register most minors as a “serious concern”. A major argument in favor of reforming sex offender laws is that sex offender registration inherently encourages vigilant justice for those who use sex offender lists to locate, harass, attack and even murder registered sex offenders.  Due to widespread access to the Internet, many lists of sex offenders can easily be found by those seeking to intimidate or otherwise harm registered offenders. While law enforcement officials strongly condemn the use of sex offender registries for harm and harassment, dozens of recorded cases of crimes against registered offenders occur each year.  They say that registries should only be accessible to law enforcement and that officials should be more careful in deciding who poses a risk, rather than the current policy, which applies indiscriminately to all offenders, because each case and each story of the accused is different.
  The movement points to the lack of evidence to support the effectiveness of sex offender registries or residency restrictions, noting that the collateral consequences of sex offender registration, such as social stigma, unemployment, homelessness, and attacks by vigilante groups, also extend to the families of those registered.   She stated that there was no way to determine whether a registrant`s behaviour had changed. “People were calling me and they were very proud to have kids as young as 10 on their sex offender registry, and I said, `No, it wasn`t for that,`” she said, adding that we shouldn`t even call children juvenile sex offenders. They are children. The terminology is completely wrong, as it lumps them in with the man who kidnapped and murdered Jacob. It`s not fair. Sexual offences are serious offences. There is no doubt that the intentions behind creating laws to punish and deter sex offenders were noble. Unfortunately, I have seen with my own eyes that this norm has been completely reversed. In the court system to which I belonged, my client was guilty until proven guilty.