One person you will NEVER have at your meeting, and that is the offenders themselves. The State just labels them dangerous and does NOTHING to lessen that danger. If these people go to therapy, does that lessen their danger? If they do not re-offend and have jobs, does THAT lessen their danger? In fact, there is NOTHING they can do to lessen their danger. You people put a system into place that calls a person dangerous and then have no way they can lessen their danger.

Are you stupid? If a person is dangerous, doesn't that person have an incentive to NOT be dangerous? What do you think human nature is, when you tell someone they are dangerous and then systematically do not allow them ever back into society? Do you think you get a productive member of society?

NO. But you don't care about victims at all. What you want is the FEELING you are safer. You could care less if your policies directly make your community MORE dangerous.

Rudy101 - Did you actually call the convicted criminal real eased with a highly restrictive parole because he is considered a threat to the community a victim? While Ohnmacht himself was not at the meeting his entire family attended. We have a responsibility to protect our families from this type of known criminal activity and while he may have served his prison sentence he is now under the watchful eyes of his community. Parole Officer Marion (for Ohnmacht) is very responsive to our community effort and he has promised to release his more than 50 restrictions as well as meet with members of the community to ensure us that he is treating this case very seriously. His office as well as the DA Fred Green encourage the community to be vigilant and that is exactly what we intend to do. Just as he has a right to live here, we have a right to report any wrongdoing or suspicious activity. He is hardly a victim, these are the consequences of his heinous crimes.

Considering the recidivist rate for citizens who commit crimes in this fashion, longer initial sentences are of greater value then parole. The very purpose of imprisoning a citizen is to increase the level of safety in any neighborhood. Knowing who these people are is of little use if they are able to overpower a defenseless child on a sidewalk with a section of woods nearby. Thus, you can either operate under the illusion that your kid is safe when they walk to school like it is 1955 or you can deal with the reality that your government no longer has the resources or even the inclination to protect the law abiding from those that would violate the most innocent among us, and act accordingly.

Exactly, Joe. That is why nobody has to follow a registry law. Your little fantasy of a kidnap and rape is so rare is to be non-existent in most of the country. BUT the idea that YOU can have complete and unfettered access to a registry and THEN go out and make your opinion known about vigilante justice is the totality of what the makes the registry illegal. See, Joe, you are not a judge. You, or ANYONE BUT a judge can go and mete punishments.

And Concerned citizen? JOE will make this offender into a victim. NOT ME.

You know what is most pathetic, Joe. Is the idea that in 1955 it was safer. Don't you remember America's apartheid? I know you don't believe little black children matter at all, but in the 1950's they had no protection from ANYONE. Your little fantasy of a safe little society was just that, a fantasy.

The offender is an outcast as a result of his heinous crimes not as a result of community banding together to be sure that he is in compliance of his parole restrictions.  If the criminal abides by the long list of things he cannot do, there will be no issue.  Sex Offenders are not protected by any law and as is the case with Ohnmacht he has been released with stringent restrictions because he is considered to be a Sexually Violent Offender.  At this time the court has decided that he is not entitled to become a productive member of society in the conventional way... clearly by limiting his ability to drive, no contact with minors, no computer or internet access and many more...I assume if he is not in violation and responds well to treatment he will eventually find his place in society but for now he remains a threat and we must be vigilant for our own safety and protection.  And lastly it is a shame and very unfortunate that we did that have legislation of this kind dating back, but now that we a registry reporting these criminals - let's use it. Next step is for our county to create Child Safety Zones just as Rockland, Putnam and Dutchess have done.

Let's keep the conversation productive and civil, please. Comments will be deleted if not abiding by our terms of use. http://bedford.patch.com/terms

I'm sad to see that still, no statistics were included in this article. If you are truly concerned about the safety of children and families, link to the NYDCJS S*x Offender "Myths and Facts" page that admits the high majority of sex crimes against children are committed by their family members or acquaintances who are not on the registry. This is so crucial. Children are told to look out for these two particular men. But what are they told about what's appropriate from a family member or friend? Why is this constantly ignored?

You also could have included some information on recidivism. It may help the community to feel more at ease if they were aware that the vast majority of s*x offenders don't reoffend.

Lastly, people, PLEASE do research on the negative aspects of "Child Safety Zones" before you demand them. Google "Bookville" if you're interested in what happens when proposals like this are based on emotion and anecdote rather than facts and very careful planning.

Statisitics are very important yet not always reliable to cite when making a case for or against any crime/ law etc. In the 2010 Recidivism Report issued by the State of Connecticut - recidivism rates still exist and level 3 offenders have the highest numbers. According to the report within 3 years during 2005-2008 an alarming 67.5% of offenders were rearrested and 56.5% were returned to prison for parole violations or to begin a new prison sentence. Violation of Parole is a predictor of increased recidivism. These rates are enough for me as a citizen of the community in which the offender lives to be vigilant about the offenders parole violations and if I suspect wrongdoing or witness violations - call Parole Officer Marion. Regardless of
the crime committed if he violates his parole sentence he will go back to prison. If the offenders advocates feel his parole sentence is too strict or limiting that should be addressed to courts as maybe convicted level 3 Sexually Violent Sex Offenders such as David Ohnmacht should have longer prison sentences and be released to a supervised half-way house.
I have not thoroughly researched Child Safety Zones and will do so before responding.

The link to the report referenced above is http://www.ct.gov/opm/lib/opm/cjppd/cjresearch/recidivismstudy/2010_0215__recidivismstudy.pdf

CC- the report you provided is very detailed and looks official, but unfortunately it is misleading. There's this statement on the second page: "This report was funded, in part, through a grant awarded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice (grant number 2009‐BJ‐CX‐K014). The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this report are those of the contributors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice." I searched the entire report and couldn't find who the actual author is. I would like to know that before relying on its credibility.

I also noticed that the new crimes committed by released prisoners were not specified. Were these parole violations such as breaking a curfew, drinking alcohol or owning a computer, or were they new s*x crimes? There is quite a difference, but all count as recidivism. I'm familiar with PO Marion and he is an reasonable, caring man who gets to know his parolees individually. At least we can agree that is a positive thing.

Lastly, I want to emphasize that I am not just an offender advocate. I'm an advocate for the truth, and for effective legislation based on facts, not fear. I agree that there are some offenders of all crimes who should not ever be released. The problem is that most methods of determining "risk" base their assessments on the past and nothing else.

OK, I just read the report again. This is not a recidivism report on s*x offenders, this is for all ex-prisoners and all types of crimes!

When I say the chance of re-offending is low, I'm referring only to s*x crimes. The overall recidivism rate for all felonies EXCEPT s*x offenses, over a 30-year period, was about 45%, which is comparable to the findings in the report. However, since we monitor and regulate SOs differently than all other felons, we need to look at the statistics for their specific crimes differently, too.

Here are some links regarding recidivism of s*x crimes ONLY:
http://sexoffenderrecidivism.com/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-heroux/sex-offenders-recidivism_b_976765.html
http://www.sofarproject.com/facts-and-info/recidivism

Here are a few articles about the negative aspects of child safety zones and similar residency restrictions:
http://www.clinicalpsychiatrynews.com/news/more-top-news/single-view/study-finds-fault-with-sex-offender-restriction-laws/2c8d6a0528.html
http://sexoffenderresearch.blogspot.com/2011/11/end-of-bookville-homeless-camp-under.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SexOffenderNewsIssuesResearchAndRecidivism+%28Sex+Offender+News%2C+Issues%2C+Research+and+Recidivism%29

Thank you, Shana. I too assumed sex offenders, especially pedophiles, were immune to treatment and would almost certainly reoffend. The Huffington Post article you linked to provides hope. Certainly, that doesn't mean we personally have to trust sex offenders, and we should be very watchful of them in our communities, but we should also do everything possible to make them less likely to reoffend.

Education is good, but hysteria and vigilantism is not. Why do we force ex-sex offenders to live at certain places when most sexual crimes occur in the victims own home? Residency restrictions do not work, they only exile and force offenders to lose jobs, housing, a way from therapy, and when you do this, when they have nothing to lose, some will lash out.

The fact is, sex offenders have one of the LOWEST recidivism rates, for a new sex crime, than any other criminal.

http://tinyurl.com/SOIRecidivism

Also, if an online shaming registry and residency laws are okay for one group, then to make it fair, we should put all criminals on an online registry a long with their photos, home and work addresses, car identification, etc.

http://tinyurl.com/AllCriminalsRegistry

The media needs to stop spreading fear and hysteria just to get ratings and viewers, that is exploitation. The media has helped turn the people into a mob, who love to be the judge, jury and executioner, and condemn someone on allegations alone, without the person even going to court. Just look at the recent PA scandal or Herman Cain! And people like Nancy Disgrace, who makes me want to puke every time I see her. No wonder she is no longer a DA/Lawyer, she's filled with hate and condemns everyone without evidence or a trial. She should be fired, IMO.

http://www.facebook.com/OfficialSOIssues
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com

Recidivism rates for Level 3 Sex Offenders such as David Ohnmacht is roughly 11% in NYS over and 8 year period. While some may consider that low it still exists and David Ohnmacht has a long history of violent, defiant behavior and as as such we will continue to educate ourselves with not only the law but his very lengthy parole restrictions so we can inform authorities of any wrongdoing. Regardless of the crime, Violation of Parole is a predictor of increased recidivism. Has anyone considered that recidivism among sexual offenders is "relatively" low because their heinous criminal behavior results in registry, stringent parole violations etc. - this is a good thing. We must act according to the law if we see something with regard to David Ohnmacht that is not compliant with his parole restrictions. Shana - after a quick review I do see some negative aspects with regard to Child Safety Zones but still on the fence as to whether they outweigh the positive aspects. I am hopeful to discuss this topic with Bob Castelli in the coming days as this is legislation he is working to have passed.

FYI - Child Safety Zones
http://bobcastelli.com/2011/11/04/level-3-sex-offender-moves-into-bedford-castelli-strengthens-call-for-%E2%80%98child-safety-zones%E2%80%99/

One of the major problems with SO legislature is that it is too broad. Different types of s*x crimes mean different profiles of offenders with different targets, MOs & risks of re-offending. However, most offenders are subjected to the same restrictions, parole/probation conditions & public stigma. Not just ineffective, it's also extremely expensive. While Level 3s may pose an 8% recidivism risk, it means 92% don't. That's a lot of resources spent monitoring people who probably don't need it.

One of the other major flaws with the legislation & those who support it is the apparent exclusion/ignorance of vital statistics. I cannot comprehend why supporters of this type of legislation so infrequently mention the likelihood that a child will be victimized by a family member or acquaintance who isn't on the registry. Prevention, not panic, is the goal. Right?

Rmember that public scrutiny doesn't effect just the offenders. Most of you will never have to experience what it is like to have a loved one on the registry, which is GOOD - but to those who live it every day, it is a nightmare. Forcing someone, & in turn their family, into the shadows doesn't make for contributing citizens. Instead, it creates an environment of disconnect and hostility - unhealthy for anyone.

Lastly, I want to say I am appreciative that this discussion has remained largely factual, non-inflammatory and validating. This is how effective legislature and community safety are truly created.

Alchemist... you are precisely the kind of person I'm referring to. If you have children, I am scared for them.

Sorry that I find pedophiles and child rapists disgusting and feel badly about having them live in my neighborhood. Real outlier opinion, that. However most people would agree with you shana-- these multiple-child convicted rapists have it so hard. Sorry you are friends with or related to a sex offender. Why don't you and mcQueary move in together?