Let's Make This Clear (Smiles Maniacally)

That's just one of the many harassing emails I've received. Attached to it were several posters this person had made accusing others of being a child molester, a child pornographer etc. We discussed all that HERE

So I do find it interesting that some people don't know when to stop. But then we already knew how they were didn't we? This one I received this morning though is quite helpful because it gives me a chance to clarify a bit more Jacey's post from yesterday


These are the facts. Lindsay Ashford supported that statistic. He linked to eadvocate for support. I won't link to a site that has such convoluted, twisted and concocted propaganda. But, since Nightmare here was so ahem helpful to post the entire entry into the email and inform me that I needed a statistics book for Dummies, I'm going to break it down even further.

Number one rule of thumb. You cannot take a statistic that measures one thing and apply it to something that it doesn't measure.

In 1994 victims reported 432,750 incidents.

This tells us nothing regarding the recidivism study. What it does tell us is that in 1994 victims reported 432,750 incidents. We don't know how many of those actually occurred. We don't know how many resulted in an arrest and we don't know how many resulted in a conviction. All we know from that is 432,750 incidents of victimization were reported in 1994.

The DoJ reported 3.5% of those sex offenders released were RECONVICTED for another sex crime, within 3 years, following their release. (DoJ Pg-24) see note below.

Accordingly, in 1994 victims reported 432,750 incidents. In 1994 3.5% of sex offenders released from prison (those who had previously committed one or more sex offenses) committed another sex offense (recidivated within 3-years of release).

This is two different reports measuring two different things. Again, you cannot take one measurement and just pick something else to apply it to, that it did not measure. This is spin. This is what pro child sexual abuse people do. This is what Lindsay Ashford did. This is what Jan Kruska did. This is what Tom Madison did and all the rest of the blame gamers who don't want to take responsibility for their actions.

What the DOJ study said is:

Of the 9,691 released sex offenders, 3.5% (339 of the 9,691) were reconvicted for a sex crime within the 3-year followup period.

The 3.5% figure was only a measure of those 9,691 people. It was not a measurement of the total number of convictions for 1994. It doesn't matter how many convictions there were that year, 5000 or ten million. The 3.5% only tells us that 3.5% of 9,691 were reconvicted. You cannot apply one result to another question. This is so very basic that we can only conclude that these people have twisted the statistics with malicious intent to deceive. There is no other plausible explanation.

"The math: (100% - 3.5% = 96.5%) 96.5% of 432,750 = 417,603 committed by someone other than a former sex offender released from prison.

What more needs to be said?"

Out of 9,691 sex offenders released in 1994, 3.5% of them were reconvicted for a sex crime within a 3 year period. This did not measure the percentage of total convictions for 1994, and it tells us nothing about anyone else convicted that year except that they weren't released the same year as these men. In 1994 there could have been men REconvicted of a sex crime who had been released in 1993, in '92, in '88 or '75 or '67.

You cannot say that 3.5% of sex offenders released in '94 recidivated within 3 years therefore everyone else convicted that year was not already a sex offender. That is WA LA Pedo Logic

Stop Lying!