Comments on: From Rage to Reason: Why We Need Sex Crime Laws Based on Facts, Not Fear (Bloomsbury, 2023), by Emily Horowitz

By: Erik McInnis

Erik McInnis — Thu, 10 Aug 2023 20:50:07 +0000

What a remarkable book! Dr. Horowitz has published a groundbreaking achievement with this work, and I would highly recommend it to all that want to understand contemporary post-conviction sex offense laws and their true impact on those forced to register as sex offenders, their families and society at large.

I first stumbled onto Dr. Horowitz’s first book “Protecting our Kids? How Sex Offender Laws are Failing Us” and was shocked with the volume of information that I thought I knew but didn’t. As a technical person, I loved all the data and the deep analytical investigation as that was all very compelling. I still recommend that book to this day. That being said, not everyone enjoys having facts presented with statistical enumeration and normal curves. Also, much has evolved within this topic in the seven years that has passed.

This new book is written in a completely different style and includes dozens of first persons narratives. Real people, none perfect, but all with pertinent and valid stories to tell. What really starts to come into focus is the degree of cruelty and hubris that modern society projects onto those they perceive as irredeemable. This castigation is nothing short of alarming when viewed through the eyes of those making the narrative. Note that all the salient points and irrefutable facts are still there from her previous book, but presented in a completely different manner that should be more appealing to a broader audience.

While reading this book, I was very much reminded of the significant portion of our population that are in opposition to the facts regarding climate change. It’s not so much that the deniers present their own compelling evidence, or any evidence at all, but rather they just don’t want to believe what the scientific community has clearly established due to religious beliefs, political association or regional tribalism. Their cathartic opinions rely mostly on ignoring facts and expertise along with a smattering of small, unsubstantiated theories often found on social media.

This unfortunate ability to either ignore evidence or be completely ignorant of the facts comprise the underpinnings for all the devastating and counterproductive laws being promulgated today against those convicted of a sex offense. There are no compelling facts supporting their opinions whatsoever; they just don’t know that.

My final take away is that this book, at it’s heart, really exposes the fact that nearly all the information that is presented to the public regarding sex offenses, those convicted of sex crimes and the subsequent sex offender registration is FALSE. Unlike climate change, there are simply no sources that an average citizen is exposed to that has countering views and presents evidence and logical arguments about these topics; none. Hopefully, this book can be a renewed starting point for this conversation in the years to come.

By: F-Texas

F-Texas — Fri, 07 Jul 2023 05:09:33 +0000

I don’t get what they’re doing? They need to have their laws go fight to have most extremes laws repealed.

By: Tim in WI

Tim in WI — Tue, 04 Jul 2023 18:55:09 +0000

I’m thinking Horowitz could be useful in the context of FTR defense. However staking the grounds to get her testimony in front of a jury would require germane* relevance to at least one the culpability questions.
“Was a person who was required to register with the WI DOCSOR.” This is Q1. Given the pre act offender can produce the State’s own record from the qualifying offense containing no such requirement, exculpatory evidence exists for the jury. In fact this defense is available to every FTR defense where added obligations came after sentencing with or without the presence of a standard waiver. If state does have in it’s possession a signed standard waiver of civil rights in the qualifying case (See Rule 11 Fed. Pleas) the FTR prosecutors have a great advantage of dismissing the necessity of expertise of a witness like Horowitz and for obvious reasons. Acknowledgment of guilt in the record being foremost in FTR context. If States have neither a signed standard waiver in the qualifying case, nor a factual record of the registration ( or bracelet) obligation in the record; the defense is greatly advantaged for obvious reasons as to Q1. Where States cannot prove absolutely a defendants obligation automatically by waiver AND in civil cause is in question in FTR context Horowitz is testimony possibly becomes relevant, primarily because no process were or undertaken place at all for the prefect offender. This necessarily raises the collateral question. If there is no record for the jury to ponder; how did the defendant ” lawfully” land on the registry in the first place. Usually its via the courts…right! That’s why AND where there is an affirmative record as evidence of all obligations in transcripts. ( available in the court clerks office.) The Supreme Court itself mentioned this divergent fact in Connecticut DPS V Doe decision when it mentioned the ” substantive 14th claim” and Connecticut law. That court understood the downstream implications of permitting Congressional use of retrospective language upon crime in Failure To Register context. They understood such situated individuals would haves state’s strategic flank, leaving an obvious vulnerability. A flank in which makes former government actors uniquely vulnerable to sublime suppositions for having waived defendants civil rights for him. A flank where Horowitz’s ” reasonable” testimony becomes relevant to defense in FTR.