When pedophiles or others convicted of sex crimes are released from prison, do you think residents in communities they move to should be informed of who they are and where they are living?

Generally yes, although if the crime involves (for instance) a 21-year-old man having sex with a 16-year-old girl who he honestly believed was "of age," then that's different. It is harsh to vilify such a person that way.

That type of behaviour is quite different from someone who violent rapes, or who molests young children.

violent sex offenders should really be databased by the government and local law enforcement. For the safety of the general public and the safety of the offender.

You should generally forfeit some right to privacy when you commit heinous acts such as the ones mentioned. Public safety comes first, especially when we are talking about highly vulnerable young children. I would definitely want myself and my loved ones to know that information so we can decide what action, if any, we should take to safeguard ourselves.

The law states that the spent time in prison is the price he paid for his crimes. Under the constitution the person regains all privileges including right of privacy after all dues are paid which this question is discussing.

Denying privilege even after paying dues is morally unjust. If you are going to discuss revoking privileges then you have to question if the person in question is/was sane and if he was fit for court of justice.

If not the basic principles of the law breaks down.

@Tiriring, your point is a fair argument but this is already being done in places like the U.S. and I don't think sanity is the point of the conversation. People get denied rights and priveleges all the time (license revocations, etc), both overtly and covertly. Fact is, the person is out there on the streets. We notify the public in many situations when there is a clear and present danger to the community such as if there is an escaped convict on the loose. If someone who fits the violent predator or pedophile category goes out and does that same type of crime again, one of the first things out of most people's mouths would be 'How come we were not told about them?'

We notify the public in many situations when there is a clear and present danger to the community such as if there is an escaped convict on the loose

This is a completely different case from above how had served his time.

 If someone who fits the violent predator or pedophile category goes out and does that same type of crime again, one of the first things out of most people's mouths would be 'How come we were not told about them?

And then there is innocent until proven guilty.

At the end you have to consider if it is a crime or a mental illness.

If it is a mental illness then the person in question spends time in a psychiatric facility to get well, not spend time in a penal correctional facility to serve time.

Neither of which should get their rights and privileges denied after getting well/spending time.

By the way using the US practice as any kind of standard is basically wrong since it is warped to the core.

Absolutely. The minute a violent or sexual crime is committed against a person, the public has the right to know. Why should a predator be given the right to hide? That's legitimizing them to do it again.

Triring Today  12:00 pm JST

The law states that the spent time in prison is the price he paid for his crimes.

Not necessarily. If a man is convicted of molesting a minor, he could be sentenced in one decision to time in prison AND to inclusion on a sex-offender registry AFTER release from prison.

So, it would not be an additional penalty being imposed after released. It would be part of the penalty to which he was sentenced from the beginning.

And one of the reasons for this is the very high frequency at which sexual criminals re-offend. It's bad enough that child molesters have already offended. To do nothing to prevent them from molesting other children would make it even worse.

Most 'modern' countries have a child sex offenders' list that can be accessed by the public, which also has a very strong effect as a deterrent to commit sexual crimes against children. However, due to the 'paper-based' administration of Japan and no connection between prefectures it would be pointless in Japan. There has been quite a few cases in Japan where a child sex offender (usually a teacher) has moved to a different prefecture after serving their sentence and getting another teaching position. Child sex offenders are the worst kind of scum. They should never be forgiven for their crimes and should be on a public list for the rest of their lives. The child is scarred for life, as should the offender be.

JenniSchiebelToday  03:47 pm JST

Not necessarily. If a man is convicted of molesting a minor, he could be sentenced in one decision to time in prison AND to inclusion on a sex-offender registry AFTER release from prison.

Where is that written within any nation's constitution?

I can show various nation's constitution that states otherwise.

Basically if they take this up to the supreme court they have a very good chance they will win since it would be a case of double jeopardy.

Lady justice does not choose by neither creed, gender of past history of violence but in your case it seems she does since you have labeled the person hazard to society even after he had paid to society of his crimes stipulated by law.

This is a very slippery slop so everyone needs to tread lightly.

This is a very difficult question. There was an excellent British movie int he 1960s about the subject, called "The Mark." My feeling is that if everyone in the neighborhood knows, they'll ostracize that person, blame him for any incident and maybe even beat him up.

The problem is these people have to go somewhere after they have done their time or if they are in therapy. If they keep getting hounded from one community to another, where do they end up?

Most 'modern' countries have a child sex offenders' list that can be accessed by the public

I would not call that society modern, more like a certain form of group-phobia led country ostracize people that does not fit the norm. You need to know how to handle the situation but you' ll need to respect the other person's liberty, rights and, freedom as long as the other person respects yours.

There should be a sex offenders register.

Need to check out the stats for offenders re-offending within a short time of release. Some US DOJ studies have it at 3-4% over 3 years; another study,  a meta-analysis of 95 studies involving a combined sample of 31,216 sex offenders. The average sexual recidivism rate found was 13.7 percent and the average overall recidivism rate was 36.9 percent, based on an average follow-up period of five to six years. In the UK, it was 8-10%. In parallel, other studies suggest it is family members and friends who are most likely to be the new victims.

What are the stats for Japan?

I would not call that society modern, more like a certain form of group-phobia led country ostracize people that does not fit the norm

Child abusers get ostracized for a reason. Gay people do not fit "the norm". Fetishists do not fit "the norm", but they participate in activities with consenting adults. Paedophiles do not. Also, as a group of people, they tend to never be cured of their urges. Some control them, something they previously could not do.

Where is that written within any nation's constitution?

Such things tend not to be directly written into constitutions. However, in the UK, if you are convicted to "life" in prison, you will more than likely eventually be released, but you will forever be under licence and can be recalled to prison. Those convicted of sexual crimes against children will not be allowed to work with children. Those with criminal convictions cannot sit on juries. A prison sentence alone does not wipe the slate clean.

The average sexual recidivism rate found was 13.7 percent and the average overall recidivism rate was 36.9 percent, based on an average follow-up period of five to six years

Statistics can be misleading. While I do not disagree with the statistics, more relevant may be the time of crime that is included in the recidivism. A large percentage of crime in the West is linked to drug addicts and is often petty in nature - theft is by far the largest crime in the UK. The fact that drug addicts keep turning up in court for minor theft offences, is not quite the same.

A more useful comparator would be the recidivism rate for those guilty of physical crimes against the person.

If not the basic principles of the law breaks down.

Laws are made to protect the innocent.

The “urge” a sex offender has doesn’t magically disappear during imprisonment or after prison time has been served. The public still needs to be protected. If the offender doesn’t enjoy full rights of privacy, so be it. It’s tough and may sometimes seem unfair, but that’s life in the real world.

That said, therapy should be made available to sex offenders. Just who should bear that label is important as well. Type and degree of an offense must be taken into consideration.

Diddle a kid or rape someone - get named and shamed.

Triring, ok go ahead show me the British constitution?

with sexual offenders they remain a threat after their release as they remain driven by the aberrant urges that caused the original offence. A sexual offenders list prevents them from obtaining a position where they will be a threat to the vulnerable It protects society and the offender.

The question of notification of the community is a much more fraught one. All too often the action taken when this sort of information has got out has been a violent over reaction even murder. Not always even the intended victim. Classic case in point where instead of targeting the paedophile they attacked a paediatrician (yes the ignorant are always among us). While the community needs protecting, so does the individual.

Basically if they take this up to the supreme court they have a very good chance they will win since it would be a case of double jeopardy.

There's no double jeopardy. Being added to a sex offender registry is part of the original punishment for the crime. You wouldn't want to leave a bottle of whiskey around an alcoholic, why would you want to leave a child around a pervert?

In Japan, it's not necessary because at least 50% of the men who have never been convicted of any crime are already perverts in hiding.

I still think its necessary. Pedophiles in particular. The last thing I want is someone that is convicted for doing things to minors moving next to a children's school. An example would be in America, when a registered sex offender whose offenses were against children is released, they are not allowed to live within or go within 1,000 feet of a school or an area where children commonly populate such as parks.

Even when it comes to teachers in Japan. If you resign from your position in a school before officially becoming convicted of a crime against a minor, you still keep your teaching license and you can work in a school system in a different area. The only ones that actually lose their licenses are those that don't resign before becoming convicted.

I think a sex offenders list should be available to the public. Certainly, it won't change a few things, but it still gives you information that could possibly help down the road.