As person who has worked in the U.S. Judicial system, I have seen this problem a number of times. Prior to 1999, the frequency in my state was minimal (still not acceptable to me, as it blurred to law, and tainted all the data by including all kinds of non-sexual offenses). After 1999, it was a whole different ballgame, with the case involving non-sexual offenses requirement to register increasing exponentially with each passing week.
As a person who has utilized the sex offender database as an additional tool to help protect the ones I love, I found it further frustrating. At least I knew that I could only rely on the information, to a certain degree. In my case, it was easy. Better safe than Sorry. However, I am not using it to employee people or for a number of other means that greatly impact those that are now branded (associated with) by crimes they did not commit.
Yes, they should be punished for what they were found guilty of, ".. a just and fair punishment..."
However, skewing the data helps no one. The ripple effect of this costs us all greatly in many ways financially and otherwise.
In my state a person found guilty with requirements to register as a sex offender, whether misdemeanor or felony sexual offense or not, MUST MADITORIALLY provide a DNA sample to the state’s database.
Thanks your article
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by auyloks.