Editorial: Proper notification

Sunday, Nov. 25, 2007 | 1:50 a.m.

Harry Berlin had the misfortune of moving into an apartment once occupied by Christopher Risdon.

Risdon, 35, is a registered sex offender, and although he doesn't live at that apartment anymore, sex-offender Web sites said he did.

As Abigail Goldman reported in the Nov. 18 Las Vegas Sun, Berlin was getting threatening house calls from people looking to settle a score with Risdon.

"I'm a nervous wreck," 71-year-old Berlin said.

Berlin's address was listed as Risdon's for nearly two years on the state's sex-offender Web site. Berlin first went to the state to get it changed. He was told to go to Metro Police. At Metro, he was told to take his complaint to the state.

Two months ago the same information appeared on Metro's new sex-offender Web site. That is when people started showing up at his door in groups.

Police say checking addresses often falls behind other priorities. Berlin didn't get any action until after he took his complaint to the Nevada chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Berlin's story is a shame. People who were using the information on the Web sites to try to harass or intimidate Risdon were close to acting as vigilantes, which is wrong. On the other side of the equation, such action may push a sex offender into hiding, which defeats the purpose of the law.

The rationale behind the law is to give the public the best information possible about sex offenders' whereabouts. For the law to work, police have to be vigilant about keeping databases current so the public is fully informed about where sex offenders live - and don't live.