I recommend, Crossroads Church Annex in Oakley.
That is their annex? No schools within 1,000 feet...
I’m not sure what your point is, again showing a listing of the Drop Inn Center’s address linked to unplaced sex offenders. It’s common knowledge that the law enforcement community has routinely given the address 217 W. 12th Street to anyone who cannot give a current address, whether they are stay at Drop Inn Center or not. In 2006, we did a study that documented that 67% of those given the address 217 W. 12th Street have never stayed at the Drop Inn Center.We regularly petition the Sheriff’s Office to remove residents who use our address, citing our intake records to prove that these individuals are not and cannot stay here. Their current response of listing “behind” 217 W. 12th St. is a cop out. The fact is they are not in or around here, but somewhere else.I don’t know if the point of your post is that we’re a community hazard because we supposedly do harbor sex offenders or that we’re cruel because we don’t... I support the work of the Ohio Justice and Policy Center: www.ojpc.org, to relook at how sex offenders are dealt with in Ohio. Until then, our facility along with the bulk of the City of Cincinnati is off limits because of the 1,000 foot rule.Also, I’d like to point out that four people in question pales in comparison to the nearly 3,000 residents we see annually. The vast majority of our residents are not criminals at all, much less sex offenders. The constant and repeated linking of the two categories breeds unjustified fear and paranoia.
Pat, I completely agree. I am trying to make a point that these guys apparently have nowhere to go. Personally, I think the sex offender restrictions are stupid and the DIC should be able to freely admit sex offenders.
BTW, I have been getting these sex offender emails for a few years now, and this is the first time I have seen "behind 217 W. Twelfth" used. Who actually determines this? A parole officer? This demonstrates one of the many weakness of the 1,000 foot rule. It actually leaves the public more in the dark, because offenders cannot list their real residence and where they lay their head at night has little to do with where they spend their awake hours.
Basically, we’ve been constantly confronting people using our address without actually staying here. I think the Sheriff’s Office is so sick of our complaints that they and the registrants are trying to avoid the issue through the back door, so to speak. In fairness to the Sheriff’s Office, they are bound to list whatever address they are given. However, I think they should not be allowed to register to a place that can’t accept them... I agree that the restrictions need to be made more specific to the individual. We once had a very elderly resident who committed a crime back in the 1970’s. He clearly did not pose a threat, but still would have been subject to the 1000 foot rule. I don’t think it’s safer to make people homeless. Maybe some sort of targeted voucher program would be the way to go in the short term. It also would be helpful if Hamilton County would print out a map of the places that were legal for offenders to reside. That being said... sex offenders do not stay at the Drop Inn Center, no matter what the notices say.
Did anyone catch the news story about this last night? It was brief and not very informative, but focused heavily on the outrage of parents and the local politicians' inability to change the situation. It was quite sensationalistic.
I did not see the news segment, but apparently there is a campaign against the DIC using the sex offenders as the pawns, and that is why Pat commented here. State law forbids most agencies from housing them becasue there are so many schools in urban areas. The unintended consequense is that the Sheriff's office really has no idea where these guys live.
That's exactly the impression I got from this news segment, especially in light of the comments made here. Much was made of the fact that sex offenders can come to the DIC during the day and, you know, that's absolutely outrageous and unacceptable, etc. ad nauseum. I think this was on Fox, so...
here's the TV report
Post a Comment
Families and Urbanism in Cincinnati