Employers' Access To Megan's Law Website: Ethical Or Not?

In 1994, New Jersey became the first state to pass Megan's Law, which established a public online registry of individuals convicted of sex-based offenses. Since then, many other states have followed suit. While the Megan's Law website provides easily accessible information on registered sex offenders, there are legal limits on the disclosure and use of this information. Employers, in particular, must exercise caution when using the website, as making employment decisions based on information obtained from the registry can expose them to substantial civil liability. This paragraph will explore the topic of whether employers can use Megan's Law website information and the legal implications involved.

Employment decisions based on Megan's Law website information

California's Megan's Law website was launched in 2004 to provide easy access to the state's database of registered sex offenders. While the website was intended to help protect families and communities, it has also raised complex questions about how employers can use the information provided.

Megan's Law prohibits the use of any information on the website for purposes related to employment decisions. This means that employers cannot use the website to refuse to hire, fire, or demote an employee or potential employee based on their presence on the registry. In fact, doing so could lead to a claim for damages, civil fines, and costly litigation expenses.

However, it is important to note that employers can still conduct criminal background checks of job applicants and employees through public records and investigative agencies. Information regarding sex offenses obtained outside of the Megan's Law website can generally be used for employment purposes. Additionally, employers can ask about criminal convictions when checking references, which can provide information about sex offense history without relying on the website.

While Megan's Law prohibits the use of the website for employment decisions, there are exceptions. For example, some employers are subject to laws that prohibit them from hiring convicted sex offenders altogether, such as schools and other educational institutions. In these cases, employers may have statutory protection from liability if they use the registry as a basis for an adverse employment action.

In conclusion, while Megan's Law website information should not be the sole basis for employment decisions, employers can and should still conduct thorough background checks and interviews to elicit adequate information about prior convictions. By obtaining this information through the proper channels, employers can make fully informed hiring decisions while remaining compliant with the law.

Criminal background checks of job applicants

In the United States, employers can conduct criminal background checks of job applicants and employees through public records and with the help of investigative agencies. They can also ask about criminal convictions when checking references. However, they must be cautious when using online information, such as that found on Megan's Law websites.

Megan's Law, first enacted in New Jersey in 1994, established a public online registry of individuals convicted of sex-based offenses. Since then, many states have adopted similar laws. While these websites can provide information about sex offenders, there are legal restrictions on their use. For example, California's Megan's Law prohibits using any information on the website for purposes related to employment. This means employers cannot use the information on the website to refuse to hire, fire, or demote an employee or potential employee. Similar laws exist in other states, and some employers are subject to laws that prohibit them from hiring convicted sex offenders.

Employers should also be aware that they cannot use a policy or practice that excludes people with certain criminal records if that policy has a "disparate impact" on individuals of a particular race, national origin, or another protected characteristic. If an employer is found to be in violation of these laws, employees and applicants can contact the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

In addition to online registries, employers can obtain information about job applicants' criminal backgrounds through background reports. These reports can include credit reports and criminal background reports. However, employers must obtain written permission from the applicant before obtaining a background report. If an employer decides not to hire or retain an employee based on the information in the report, they must provide the employee with a copy of the report and a "notice of rights."

Statutory protection from liability

California's Megan's Law, enacted in 1996, establishes a publicly available online registry of individuals convicted of sex-based offenses. The law mandates the California Department of Justice to notify the public about specified registered sex offenders, and authorises law enforcement to do the same when necessary to ensure public safety.

While the website is a useful resource, employers must exercise caution when using it. California's Megan's Law prohibits the use of any information on the website for purposes relating to employment. This means that employers cannot use the website as a basis for refusing to hire, firing, or demoting an employee or potential employee. If employers use the website to make employment decisions, they expose themselves to substantial civil liability.

However, some employers are subject to laws that prohibit them from hiring convicted sex offenders. For example, Section 45122.1 of the Education Code forbids schools from hiring persons convicted of sex offenses. In such cases, employers have statutory protection from liability if they use the registry as a basis for an adverse employment action.

To avoid liability, employers can conduct criminal background checks of job applicants and employees through public records and investigative agencies. Information regarding sex offenses obtained outside of the Megan's Law website can generally be used for employment purposes. Employers can also ask about criminal convictions when checking references. By relying on these alternative methods, employers can obtain information about sex offense history while avoiding the risks associated with using the Megan's Law website.

Exceptions to Section 290.46

Megan's Law, enacted in California in 1996, requires the Department of Justice to maintain a website (www.meganslaw.ca.gov) that provides the public with information on registered sex offenders. The website includes the offender's picture, home address, conviction(s), and other identifying information.

While employers in California routinely review the criminal records of job applicants, the use of Megan's Law website information for employment purposes is prohibited, with some exceptions. These exceptions, outlined in Penal Code § 290.46(l), emphasize that a person is authorized to use the disclosed information to protect a person at risk. This includes children, patients at healthcare facilities, and adults who are physically handicapped, mentally impaired, or otherwise incompetent.

Additionally, Penal Code section 290.46(l)(3) lists several statutes that are not affected by the prohibition against certain uses of information on the Megan's Law website. These include Sections 11105 and 11105.3, Sections 8808 of the Family Code, Sections 777.5 and 14409.2 of the Financial Code, Sections 1522.01 and 1596.871 of the Health and Safety Code, and Section 432.7 of the Labor Code.

It is important to note that being excluded from the Megan's Law website does not terminate the duties of a sex offender to register under Penal Code Section 290. There are also privately-operated, public criminal offender websites that may display incorrect information, and there is currently no government regulation of these private databases.

Interview techniques to elicit information about prior convictions

Open-ended Questions

Asking open-ended questions can help elicit information that the interviewee may not have initially shared. For example, asking "Was the car an estate or a saloon?" may encourage the interviewee to provide more detail than a simple yes or no question. Interviewers should also be mindful of the potential disadvantage of restricting an interviewee's answer with closed questions.

Non-leading Questions

Non-leading questions have been shown to elicit more truthful responses. Interviewers should compose questions so that only one answer is required and that answer is straightforward and frank.

Information-gathering

The information-gathering approach, such as the PEACE method, focuses on obtaining information rather than a confession. This technique avoids assumptions of guilt and the associated harmful actions of confirmation bias. It involves allowing the interviewee to tell their story without interruption and then presenting any inconsistencies or contradictions between the story and other evidence.

Behaviour Analysis Interview (BAI)

The BAI is a non-accusatory question and answer session involving standard investigative questions and "structured behaviour-provoking questions" to elicit behavioural symptoms of truth or deception. The interviewer first asks background questions to establish personal information and evaluate the interviewee's normal verbal and non-verbal behaviour. They then ask behaviour-provoking questions to elicit different responses from truthful and deceptive suspects.

Factual Analysis

Factual analysis involves evaluating each suspect with respect to specific observations relating to the crime. This includes crime scene analysis, the suspect's bio-social status, opportunity and access to commit the crime, their behaviour before and after the crime, and their motivations and propensity to commit the crime.

Prior Convictions

In some jurisdictions, such as England and Wales, the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA) allows for the admissibility of previous convictions to support the propensity to commit similar offences or to be untruthful. Interviewers should be aware of the relevant laws and guidelines in their jurisdiction when asking about prior convictions.

Frequently asked questions