Halloween Frights

Posted on Categories Criminal Law & Process, Family Law

It’s Halloween, so children have dreams of scaring adults, and adults have nightmares about other adults harming children. Lawmakers in Missouri this year have been concerned about a particular kind of harm: sexual offenses against children. They passed a state law that prohibited convicted sexual offenders from having any “Halloween-related contact with children,” and required the offenders to remain at their homes on Halloween night between the trick-or-treat hours of 5 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. unless they have “just cause” for leaving. The law did not define either “just cause” or “Halloween-related contact.” The law also required sexual offenders to turn off any porch lights and to post signs stating “no candy or treats at this residence.”

On Monday a federal judge issued an order blocking most parts of the statute as unclear, leaving in place only the provisions requiring that porch lights be extinguished and that there be a sign announcing that no candy would be given out at the offenders’ residences. Opponents of the law had argued that it was unclear; for example, did it prohibit contact between the sexual offenders and their own children on Halloween even if such contact would not be prohibited on other days? Would a convicted sexual offender have to avoid the decoration section of stores if children were there picking out their pumpkins? Opponents also argued that the law was an unfair double punishment for a crime for which a sentence had already been served.

Did the court make the right decision? I would say yes.

The image of a sexual offender luring an unsuspecting trick-or-treater into his or her home is unsettling to be sure. However, forbidding the offenders from offering treats at their homes addresses this issue quite adequately. It hardly seems necessary from a child protection perspective to subject the sexual offenders to a form of house arrest and deny them virtually all participation in Halloween activities. There is nothing about Halloween itself that makes sexual offenders more likely to offend again, other than the temptation of children appearing on their front porches – but that has already been addressed by the statute. Many sexual offenders have parole terms that limit their contact with children anyway, so trying to limit such contact further does indeed seem like a type of blanket punishment imposed upon people who have already been punished in other, individually determined ways.

I think that this Halloween law is indicative of a larger, uncomfortable truth: many people regard sexual offenders as ghouls and vampires who are not quite human. Since Halloween is the holiday dedicated to such creatures, it may seem that sexual offenders would naturally join the ghosts and goblins in wreaking havoc on the rest of us. We already live in a society where we can easily locate registered sexual offenders and, presumably, avoid them (see for example www.familywatchdog.us/ to map the location of sexual offenders near your home). Another truth is this: sexual offenders are human beings who have committed serious crimes. If they have been tried and convicted, they have served time. If they have been released, then they may need further rehabilitation. They should not be punished indiscriminately, however, when there is no proof of further crimes.

Perhaps the most frightening truth is this: it is the unidentified sexual offenders who have not been caught, tried or convicted who pose the greatest risk to our children. We can’t protect our children against those people with Halloween laws. We will have to rely instead on supervising our children closely and teaching them common sense ways to protect themselves when we cannot be with them.

2 thoughts on “Halloween Frights”

  1. I wrote this blog posting last night: today’s New York Times reports that the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted the stay on the law imposed by the lower court. This means that the law will be enforced in its entirety, vagueness and all.

  2. I have done my best to raise four children, and I have worried as much as other parents about those who would commit sexual offenses against children. However, I think Prof. McMullen is correct in suggesting that these real and imagined offenders have become something of the ultimate pariahs in contemporary society. I find it troubling that they are tracked down by cheap journalists, exposed in lists and newsletters, and expelled from towns and neighborhoods. The treatment resembles that of Communists in the ’50s or black radicals in the ’60s. The excessive “othering” of these offenders reveals an almost desperate need to say we – the non-offenders – are in fact moral citizens who love children.

Join the Conversation

We reserve the right not to publish comments based on such concerns as redundancy, incivility, untimeliness, poor writing, etc. All comments must include the first and last name of the author in the NAME field and a valid e-mail address.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.