Static-99 the Fatally Flawed Sexual Evaluation Predictor
After serving 15-years in prison, September 1990-June 2005, Anthony E. Sowell moved into Cleveland’s Ward 2 an impoverished community. September 1, 2005, he was scheduled to report to Cuyahoga Court Psychiatric Clinic. Due to his conviction being sexual in nature he was required to undergo a “sexual predator evaluation.”
One of it’s primary objective was to determine his level of threat to the community. And predict what were the chances he would re-offend again.
Obviously this instrument and it’s accuracy was literally a matter of public safety.
Static-99, the risk assessment tool, literally held the power of life or death in it’s hands.
No one can see into the future with accuracy.
But the past gives us all 20/20 vision. History teaches us vital lessons that can’t be ignored.
On September 7, 2005, Static-99 determined that Sowell had a 6% chance to re-offend.
On October 29, 2009, the CPD made the grisly discovery of 11 women badly decomposed remains.
Was Static-99 a fatally flawed evaluation tool? Did it fail public safety?
Sexual Offender Notice that never happened
Wait. It get’s Worse
Note the date on the cover page of Sowell’s Psych Evaluation?
September 7, 2005.
Static-99 Sexual Evaluation Predictor is so named in part because of the year it was created. 1999. However, Cleveland’s Court Psychiatric Clinic was using this tool six years later. Why is that problematic?
Static-99 was replaced by Static-2002.
The psychiatric community knew the latter addressed the dangerously inherent flaws of the former.
Think of it like a recall by a major manufacturer. Once it has been determined their product is a risk to public safety, the responsible thing to do is a nationwide or global recall.
Negligence can and will lead to civil action.
Therefore, in the interest of public safety, as far as a violent sexual predator is concerned, why was the City of Cleveland still using a widely known fatally flawed Sexual Evaluation Predictor? Three years after a superior one (Static-2002) was available?
Wasn’t the impoverished community Mr. Sowell had settled into deserving of better?
“to be reckless, conduct must demonstrate indifference to the consequences under circumstances involving peril to the life or safety of others, although no harm is intended.” – West’s Encyclopedia of America Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008.
If you’re not conscientious enough to use the most current instrument or tool available for the sake of public safety, “although no harm is intended,” your conduct demonstrates “indifference to the consequences involving peril to the life or safety of others” via the above legal definition is reckless.
Was Static-99 responsible for V. Crutcher’s (2006) and 11-Women of Imperial Avenue’s Demise (2007-2009)?