A pioneer in managing sex offenders in Colorado is proposing an idea to put most rapists and child molesters in enclaves called Sex Offender Containment and Research facilities, where they would live apart from the rest of society.
They would leave these largely self-contained communities only to work or for approved errands.
“We have to stop focusing solely on where sex offenders cannot live – which is the easy part – and find safe settings for where they can live while still in our communities,” said Greig Veeder, founder of Teaching Humane Existence, which treats about 80 sex offenders.
Variations of Veeder’s idea, on a smaller scale, exist in other states where sex offenders are held indefinitely after serving prison sentences if they are deemed dangerous.
Skeptics of Veeder’s proposal say such a plan could violate the constitutional rights of sex offenders and be too costly.
“To say we are going to basically incarcerate these people indefinitely is cost-prohibitive,” said Alison Morgan, a Department of Corrections supervisor serving as an adviser for the Governor’s Task Force on Sexually Violent Predators.
Veeder’s vision for the future of sex offenders is tough by design. It is the first plan that adequately addresses the threat sex offenders pose to society, he said. He says probation, parole and sex- offender registration aren’t enough.
Currently, sex offenders live in most any neighborhood. There are 4,573 people convicted of felony sexual assaults living in Colorado, according to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation.
Veeder introduced his proposal in broad terms this past summer at a legislative hearing chaired by House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, who is addressing problems with the state’s sexually-violent-predator rules.
“I start with the premise that what we’re doing isn’t working very well,” Romanoff said. “I think (Veeder’s plan) is an intriguing idea. I’m glad somebody is thinking outside the box.”
Veeder’s name is recognized among public officials and private therapists who supervise sex offenders, said Jeff Jenks, owner of Amich and Jenks, which polygraphs sex offenders.
Jenks and Dr. Stephen Brake, a psychologist who evaluates sex offenders before sentencing, said they think Veeder’s idea for a sex-offender containment complex is a good one.
“I think it’s a great idea for many or most sex offenders,” said Brake, a member of the Colorado Sex Offender Management Board. “It fits within the framework of lifetime supervision. Short- term treatment programs haven’t been consistently proven reliable.”
Other states have overcome constitutional challenges to keeping sex offenders detained, according to Doug Marek, deputy Iowa attorney general.
Sixteen states, including Iowa, California, Washington and Arizona, have programs in which judges order dangerous sex offenders to be placed indefinitely in state hospital-like facilities after their release from prison.
The sex offenders in Veeder’s program would still be on parole or probation. But because Colorado has lifetime community supervision statutes, they could remain under state control for the remainder of their lives.
Another big difference between the programs in other states and Veeder’s idea is scope.
Veeder wants to isolate about 75 percent to 80 percent of convicted sex offenders from society; the other programs have displaced less than 1 percent. Iowa has placed only 50 sex offenders in a state psychiatric hospital, Marek said.
Segregating nearly an entire class of criminals could violate their rights, he said. From a practical position, it could also be prohibitively expensive, several experts say.
“It could be a runaway train,” Marek said.
Under Veeder’s plan, Marek calculated, Iowa would have to house thousands of sex offenders.
But programs like Iowa’s, Veeder says, miss a key fact proven by experience and research: More than half of all sex offenders reoffend.
Denver lawyer David Miller is a board member of the Colorado American Civil Liberties Union and of Veeder’s Teaching Humane Existence.
Emphasizing that he can speak only for himself and not for the two groups, he said he doesn’t see constitutional obstacles to Veeder’s plan if lifetime parole and probation statutes are upheld.
All Veeder’s program does is give sex offenders in jail and prison a chance to return to the community and have more freedoms, he said.
Veeder said his plan would come with some start-up costs, including building or buying a facility, but ongoing operational costs would be offset by rental payments and treatment fees paid by the residents. He has not calculated what it would cost, he said.
Under Veeder’s plan, offenders who commit minor crimes would not be affected. Likewise, the most dangerous offenders, such as serial rapist Brent J. Brents, would not get a chance to go to the containment facility, which would be located outside of residential neighborhoods.
The sex offenders could visit family members only under supervision in special visiting rooms. They would attend mandatory sex-offender treatment meetings. While outside the fenced containment complexes, sex offenders would be governed by strict rules and would be shadowed by a satellite system that can track their steps.
Romanoff said he has concerns that such a plan could violate constitutional rights, but he added that by breaking the law, the offenders lose some of their rights already.
“I’m in favor of doing something different, and I think this idea is worth exploring,” Romanoff said.
Staff writer Kirk Mitchell can be reached at 303-820-1206 or kmitchell@denverpost.com.
