Orville Taylor | Offenders’ registry

Some people just cannot be fixed. Some people are born ‘a certain way’. While it might conveniently suit some arguments; it is an extremely dangerous door to open.

Over the years, swords have been drawn with a few extremist advocates for sexual minorities, who far too often push a ‘born gay’ narrative. What is unacceptable about this line of reasoning is that it is the same position taken by the pseudoscience of eugenics that argued for not only genetic predisposition but also incorrigibility of certain behavioural and life paths. Therefore, many generations of African descendants in the colonies of the Americas were simply told and grew up to believe that they were only suited for certain types of vocations, as their brain was simply not designed for professions.

Indeed, genetic determinism, when wielded irrationally and indiscriminately, goes against the fundamentals of Christianity, whose central tenet is that every single human being can be born again, washed clean of sin, become a new person and a suitable host for the Holy Spirit, who will not only guide such individual to eternal life after resurrection but, most important, to behavioural change while still occupying this flesh puppet we call a body.

Frequently, ‘Lord! Lord!” Christians, who support the death penalty, justify it on the basis of Mosaic Laws. Generally validating the stance based on the seriousness of the offence, a common question is, “imagine a man who kills multiple victims!” My responses invariably reference Saul, who as Paul, became the main character in the growth of Christianity after killing countless early believers.

If he, the despicable persecutor and murderer of Jesus’ followers, could be transformed and become the person whose words and letters to his Christian fellows were taken as ‘Gospel’ and unimpeachably the word of God, then who cannot?

Last week, my paternal and alpha male instincts went into overdrive. A horrific crime was committed against a 10-year-old child. She was raped and slaughtered like a pig. Every unit of DNA shared with chimpanzee kicked in and, doubtless, like everyone else, part of me wanted the immediate taking of ‘three points’.

Subsequent to the crime, a man, believed to be the perpetrator was set upon by a mob and died after being savagely beaten. ‘Jungle justice’ it is called, in true chimpanzee style. But it is not justice, because justice means following an agreed process for the determination of guilt, even if the suspect confesses.

The only place where a confession is proof of guilt is a court of law, when the guilty plea or external admission of culpability is accepted by a judge. Even courts sometimes get it wrong with capital offences. Innocent people have spent lifetimes in prison, including for sex offences. Convicts, executed for murder, were later completely eliminated based on DNA and other irrefutable evidence post facto. This is one of the reasons for opposing this ultimate irreversible punishment, because life cannot be restored once taken.

Mob executions have no space in my universe. Just over four years ago, a bloodthirsty rabble killed an innocent decent family man, Chieftain Campbell, on suspicion of robbery, a crime which, even when proven, does not carry a death sentence.

In the wake of this recent macabre case, calls have gone out again for a public sex offenders’ registry.

After all, the public needs to know who the predators are. We certainly want to be informed if an ex-con who raped or even fondled a child is our neighbour. Yet, inasmuch as I think these criminals are the most despicable, the question must be asked as to which science instructs the jurisprudence that legislates a registry?

Is there an assumption, based on science or other empirical methods, that these offenders are more dangerous? Importantly, is there evidence that they are not only more dangerous but also more likely to reoffend?

It might surprise, but the reoffending rates for criminals in Jamaica are low by global standards.

Kudos to the team from The Department of Correctional Services; the recidivism rate declined to 27 per cent, down from the decade average of up to 2021 of more than 40 per cent. In the USA, 66 per cent of former inmates get re-arrested within three years. Moreover, just over 61 per cent are back in incarceration by Year 10.

Intriguingly, the science does not seem to match the narrative about repeat offenders. A deeper study will reveal the specific rates for major crimes locally. However, globally, thieves and robbers, including petty and car crooks, average 75 per cent in reoffending.

This category justifies the proverb “once a thief always a thief”. Fraudsters have a repeat rate of 40 to 50 per cent. Integrity and corruption crimes have a low rate as well, and here one suspects that the opportunities usually decline sharply with the first convictions. Public servants have no likelihood of being reemployed in Jamaica’s public sector. However, politicians can continue.

Murderers typically are around two per cent for another homicide, but have a 22 per cent rate for other acts of violence. Drug users are no-brainers, being addicts, and thus are in the high 70s. Yet, drug peddlers and traffickers average 50 per cent.

Yet, counter-intuitively, sex offenders have among the lowest repeat rates, averaging some 14 per cent. Where rearrested, they generally commit another unrelated crime. So, the reoffending fear is not based on science. Nonetheless, it is simply that we loathe them so much that we never forgive them.

Being human, I totally empathise with the antipathy; but maybe a full criminal registry, especially for violent offenders and thieves, is what is needed.

Christ said love thy neighbour; but you cannot love who you do not know.

Orville Taylor is senior lecturer at Department of Sociology at The University of the West Indies, a radio talk-show host, and author of ‘Broken Promises, Hearts and Pockets’. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and tayloronblackline@hotmail.com.