Sans Fig Leaf

Previous
Index
Next

Email

w

"Soured"

22 March, 2002

The community found itself in an uproar. It wasn't used to being in such an agitated state. It prided itself on how laid back and hip it was, in that smug way sort of way that only a community can be.

But they had just learned that a person who was sharing one of the rental homes in their quiet little neighborhood was what we used to call an ex-convict. He'd been convicted of some crimes, had served his sentence, and was now trying to return to society as, it is hoped, a productive citizen.

Except that he was convicted of raping four women, and for most people that makes it a whole different kettle of fish. A sour kettle of fish, at that. People were angry. How could "they" allow someone to move into their neighborhood, far from the nearest police station? Why didn't "they" tell the community sooner? Did "they" dump him there, suspecting he would re-offend and therefore give "them" a chance to lock him up again. Finally, enough pressure was brought to bear on the landlords that the ex-convict is evicted. No one knows where he's going, and no one in the community seems to care. One famous resident was quoted as saying, "Maybe the cross that a former rapist has to bear is having a difficult time finding a place to live."

It seems to have escaped everyone's notice that in our society, there isn't a "living permit" required to move in somewhere. A citizen is free to live where ever he or she can afford to. Even really scary citizens who have committed heinous, inexcusable crimes. Provided they have served their prison sentence and have not since committed any crimes.

That doesn't mean the community is obligated to welcome him with open arms and pretend that his past never happened. But getting angry at law enforcement officials for not doing something which they are legally forbidden to do isn't addressing the issue. And trying to pass laws that would grant the authorities the legal power to do that isn't the solution, either, as many states and communities have been discovering over the years. Such draconian measures turn the ex-convicts in question into homeless, jobless people--exactly the kind of situation that makes someone feel angry, bitter, and revengeful.

Not exactly the sort of feelings that make them likely to resist their urges to harm others.

And there are other options. Another neighborhood in the same region has been dealing with 16 ex-convict sex offenders in a much more reasonable fashion. After screaming at authorities for a few months, members of the community finally started talking with each other, the experts, and the local law enforcement people and realized there were other options.

They created a group called "Georgetown Guardians" to monitor, and where possible, mentor these social outcasts. The "Guardians" check on the men regularly, making sure they are on their medication, going to therapy sessions, keeping their jobs, and not hurting any one. For over two years it's worked. There is no guarantee that none of the men will offend again, but it's better than abdicating responsibility by shoving the problem onto another neighborhood. And it is working in other communities, too.

It didn't require draconian new laws. Besides, the legal system isn't really equipped to handle someone who might commit a crime. That's something which is far better handled by social forces, like the "Guardians." We seem to have forgotten how powerful a force societal pressure can be. One just has to look at the recent case of a man who killed his four children, his wife, and then killed himself to avoid the "humiliation" of asking for financial help after his business had gone bankrupt to remember that shame and pride are potent weapons.

The communities where people were working together to monitor the former offenders had one thing in common: they were all low-income communities. Unlike the one I mentioned at the beginning. I find it particularly ironic that one of the residents made his "cross bearing" comment during the session of Lent.

The more upscale community didn't look at alternatives. They didn't vandalize the man's property as some communities elsewhere have when they found themselves in a similar situation. They didn't attack him directly, or threaten him. They simply asked the landlord to turn him out on the street. An ordinary eviction. Completely civil. They didn't care about the fact that this guy, now maybe a little angrier and more desperate, is going to settle somewhere else. That's not their problem. They have washed their hands of the matter. Just like Pontius Pilate.

Make no mistake, I don't hold any illusions that the ex-con is as innocent as a lamb. He's no saint and deserves little, if any, sympathy. But he is a human being who has already been punished for his past crimes. He has to earn society's trust, now. While it wouldn't be easy under ideal conditions, it's darn near impossible if he becomes a resentful nomad, shuttled from place to place.

Those who have foisted him on someone else feel relieved and safe. Like Pilate, they probably think that they came out of this smelling sweet.

But they should check those hands they just washed, because from here, something smells quite sour.