Living in the Future

To readers from Dee: In his letter of July 29, 2012, Steve began to talk about where he might go to live when he is released (even though his release date was still four years away). Steve’s presiding judge sentenced him to lifetime supervision, which requires him to report monthly to his probation officer (PO). For the rest of his life, he must obtain permission from his PO to leave the state; have any direct contact with anyone under the age of 18; enter any area where children frequently congregate including, but not limited to, schools daycare centers, theme parks; theaters, and playgrounds (imagine if he was someone who had young children of his own!); possess or use any media forms containing sexually oriented material; own any camera or recording device; or use a computer or gaming device or cell phone (anything capable of internet connection whether or not such connection exists). As you can see, his quality of life will be greatly influenced by the luck of the draw when it comes to PO assignments.

It is interesting to note that the judge also recommended that Steve “participate in intensive sex offender treatment and educational and vocational programs during incarceration.” No such programs exist in his federal prison!

Although Steve’s was a federal offense because it took place over the internet, federal probation officers generally follow the rules laid down by the state in which they operate. Following the passage of a law in Florida in 2005 commonly referred to as Jessica’s law, all but about six states have enacted laws either allowing or requiring electronic monitoring of SOs, among other things. Though I could not ascertain from my internet research which monitoring laws might apply to him because most descriptions I saw referred to “certain SOs” or “specified SOs,” California, the state where Steve grew up and had his career and in which his child and grandchildren live, requires GPS monitoring of SOs for life regardless of whether or not they ever touched a child inappropriately.

In addition, many states have laws about SOs not being allowed to live within 1000 feet or 2000 feet of any place where children gather. This includes preschools, schools, children’s recreation areas, parks, and in some cities, even churches. Many corrections departments have come to realize that residency restrictions hamper the reentry process for offenders, make it more likely that they will not get treatment, and increase their chances of recidivism. Often, they are forced to live in remote areas where they cannot easily access services or employment, and it is well documented that an increasing number of SOs are becoming homeless. It’s no wonder, then, that Steve was casting around for information on states in which he might have an actual chance of living a semi-normal life.

In his letter of August 5, 2012, Steve wrote:

Dear Dee,

Your packet on federal probation and supervised release was pretty overwhelming and sent me into a downward spiral for a time. I was having thoughts of “What’s the point? If I can’t be near or with those I love, what kind of quality of life is going to be possible?” I got past that and am doing my best to stay focused on what can be achieved as opposed to what cannot. The GPS ankle bracelet thing is a deal breaker. I cannot and will not spend the rest of my life being tracked like a wild animal. I am not and have never been a predator. I have even thought of the radical solution of fleeing the country altogether. There is still a lot of research to be done. It seems to me that we need to focus our attention on finding a place where they make some kind of distinction between child molesters and those who have done what I did. The only real hope I have is that some of those laws will get re-examined in the next four years. With the increasing numbers of people being locked up for this, it’s going to place an enormous burden on the probation departments as these people move through the system and beck out into the free world.

I signed my divorce papers yesterday. It’s a done deal, but of course, I’m still financially attached to P. until the house sells. At the moment, no one is even looking at it. If we can disengage our finances by the mid-point of my sentence, next April, then I will have a chance to save up nearly $100,000 from my pensions by the time I am released, but that’s a big “if.”

Fleck’s piece this week was titled “Living in the Present.” It says that the past and the future are reference points for where we’ve been and where we hope to go, but we cannot act in the future or the past, only in the present. Do you think he’s telling me not to obsess about my life four years from now?

That’s it for this week. Send sermons!

Love, Steve