By Sandy and John . . . Portez Smith arrived outside Jesse Grover’s duplex early on Sunday, November 17, 2024, yelling through the closed door, “Grover, you’re a f—ing pedophile,” and when Grover opened the door, Smith pulled out a gun and shot him to death. Jesse Grover was registered on Pennsylvania’s sex offender registry as a Tier I offender. This holiday season, Grover leaves behind his wife, parents, four siblings, four stepchildren, and numerous other family members. He is remembered for his sweet smile and gentleness and as a beloved family member, a good friend, and a lover of reading, cooking, and music.

Grover’s murder is not the first registrant to face such a fate. Gary Blanton was a young married father of two infant sons living in Washington State when, in 2012, Patrick Drum shot him to death for being on the Washington registry for a consensual sexual act with another minor from twelve years prior. Drum then went to the home of registrant Jerry Ray and killed him. With the Washington sex offender registry in hand, he was on the way to shoot a third registrant in another county when apprehended (https://archive.is/T5Zc5).

Charles and Gretchen Parker were at their South Carolina home when Jeremy and Christine Moody stopped in front of their house and raised the hood of their car. Charles was a mechanic and went outside to help. The Moodys entered their home and slaughtered both Charles, a South Carolina registrant, and his wife Gretchen, with a gun and knife. Like Drum, they already had targeted their next victim, another person on the sex offender registry, when they were apprehended. In the wake of these murders, the National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws asked then-governor Nikki Haley to have the home addresses of registrants removed from the public view of the online registry; the request was disregarded.

Portez Smith’s rant at Jesse Grover reveals almost as much about his beliefs as his senseless act of violence does. It is commonly believed that everyone on a registry has a sexual offense against a child: This is a fallacy. In every state, virtually every crime that can have a sexual component carries with it an obligation to register. In many states, non-sexual crimes require registration. And in some states, many of those required to register are minors. Blanton was the same age as his teenage girlfriend when he was convicted for consensual sex with her; her parents pushed for an arrest when they learned of the relationship. Statistics suggest that a third of the offenders against minors are themselves minors. Children have been put on a registry as young as eight.

The most disturbing factor about these murders is that a segment of the community views these vigilantes as heroes. Social media and online articles about these incidents further this perception by allowing ten or even twenty comments praising the vigilante for each one condemning the act of violence. Recently, the glorification of “predator catchers” has driven groups of gangs and teenagers to show up at registrants’ homes to “carry out justice.”  Numerous studies document various degrees of violence and harassment registrants and their family members face daily. 

Blanton’s wife publicly asked that Drum’s supporters stop the harassment of her and her children. According to CBS News, the judge at Drum’s hearing admonished those who were in the courtroom in support of Drum to cease their activity. Leslie said she and her family had been spat upon, had things thrown at their car, had their house targeted, and more.

So what is the answer? The first, quickest, and most straightforward answer is a “band-aid” measure that NARSOL asked South Carolina to take: remove the home and business addresses from public view. This will at least require vigilantes to work a little harder to achieve their goals. Supporters of the registry argue that knowing where registrants live protects their communities, but the USDOJ reports that more than 93% of the cases of sexual harm are committed by someone known to the victim, and 95% are not registrants. Additionally research shows that sex crimes have the lowest recidivism rates of any crime class tracked except murder.

The long-term fix is not an easy one. It involves changing hearts and minds toward a willingness to put aside emotional responses and adopt rational and logical facts. Several decades of evidence-based data show us the sex offender registry is ineffective at every level. It does not make communities safer, protect children from sexual abuse, help those who have caused harm, nor heal those who have been harmed. Instead, it puts families of registrants in harm’s way, impedes rehabilitation, destroys the opportunity to rebuild damaged lives, and costs taxpayers an enormous and ever-burgeoning amount of resources.

One bright spot on the horizon is the increasing prevalence of restorative justice programs. These alternatives to harsh punishment for offenders and nothing for those offended bring the two sides together—for those who choose it—to dialogue, understand each other better, express remorse and forgiveness, and pave the road for future reconciliation. Because the majority of sexual harm happens within families, this is an excellent choice. 

Policymakers need to abolish the secondary punishments accompanying registration. Special restrictions such as residence, proximity, and Halloween restrictions are statistically useless in furthering public safety and child protection. Abolishing them would save significant public funds that could be better used for evidence-based prevention measures.

Most legislators claim to be fiscally responsible, data-informed, and against unfunded mandates. Yet they seem to forget those words when it comes to tightening the plethora of laws and restrictions (such as residence, proximity, and Halloween restrictions) that affect persons required to register. Politicians wanting to project a “tough on crime” platform turn to sex crimes because society’s taboo on anything sexual combined with the visceral nature of sex crimes causes electors and officials to abandon rationality for emotionalism. 

Meaningful reform will begin when enough citizens protest the waste of human lives and public monies and when decision-makers at all levels adopt evidence-based solutions to preventing sexual harm and rehabilitating those with past sexual offenses.

* A version of this article also appeared in the December 20, 2024 issue of Merion West.

The post Vigilantism & Death: A Harsh Reality for Citizens on the ‘Sex Offender’ Registry first appeared on NARSOL.

By Sandy . . . It started with Chris Hanson and To Catch a Predator, a mainstream television

program where potential online sexual predators lured by a civilian sting operation were “busted” by police officers, often with tasers drawn and pointed and terrifyingly threatening. The police presence lent a legitimacy to what was in reality a vigilante scheme. The suicide of an assistant district attorney in Texas as the film crew and police officers approached where he had been lured ratcheted up existing criticisms of entrapment and heralded the demise of the show.

That was in 2008.

Isolated incidents of vigilantism against persons listed on sex offender registries started almost as soon as the registry was created and, over the years, resulted in clear criminal conduct of arson, violent assault, and murder against registrants. Those committing such acts, when apprehended, were charged and prosecuted.

Bit by bit, “acceptable” vigilantism evolved, acceptable in that large groups support vigilante language and activity against registrants occurring on social media platforms.

Tik-Tok is especially egregious. While company officials claim they are concerned about having “responsible” content, what is available is often far from responsible. A dangerous trend has developed where groups on Tik-Tok are emulating the premise of To Catch a Predator—absent the presence of law enforcement, of course, as these potentially dangerous, amateur endeavors are without even pretend-legitimacy.

A group of Assumption University students in Massachusetts took even that criminal behavior a step further. Possibly unable to find a victim willing to meet with a minor, possibly thinking this would be “more fun,” they created their own victim. They snared a young man, 18, on the legitimate dating app Tinder. Believing he would be having a first date, he was lured to the university and falsely accused of seeking an underage girl for sex. The vigilantes incited a larger mob against him, chased him down, and beat him ruthlessly, all the while recording the attack.

Law enforcement is taking this seriously, thankfully; the initiators of the scheme are facing criminal charges.

This is where we are now. Anti-registry activists such as the National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws and its affiliates expect registrants to be targeted for various illegal activities. They are targeted for a variety of scams. They, as well as their family members, are targeted for many forms of vigilantism, some of which have ended in murder.

Now, it appears we must anticipate vigilantism in a totally fabricated situation. How many innocent individuals will be targeted, harmed, reputation destroyed, even murdered? Where will it stop? Will it stop?

It is so easy to blame today’s technology, but every age has brought with it an advancement over the previous one in the way of new technology—the telegraph, the telephone, television, the internet, computers, smart-phones, social media. Future ages will see technological advances not even imagined now. These may facilitate crime; they make it easier. But they are not to blame.

It is cruelty in human hearts that is to blame. It is the need to create a scapegoat, someone lower than ourselves so that we can feel superior. It is arrogance that causes us to assume the role of judge over others, and it is perversity that enables us to delight in exposing others’ weaknesses and faults.

It is a special type of cruelty that allows us to create guilt where there is none, and to do so for our amusement. Those who do this believe themselves to be clever and entertaining. They mistake the support of like-minded individuals as validation of their cleverness. But they are not clever. They are not entertaining.

They are only petty and vicious.

And unbelievably cruel.

The post The new vigilantism first appeared on NARSOL.