Opinion ID: 789142
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Parties' Cross-Motions for Partial Summary Judgment

Text: 49 The parties cross-moved for partial summary judgment. Hobbs, by then represented by counsel, contended that he was entitled to judgment principally on the basis that all of Playland is a traditional public forum in which he has an absolute right, under the First Amendment, to perform. 50 Defendants contended (a) that they were entitled to judgment on the grounds, inter alia, that Playland in its entirety is a nonpublic forum because the County operates it in a proprietary capacity, and (b) that the state-law provisions authorizing the denial of an employment license to a convicted criminal where granting such license would involve an unreasonable risk to property or to the safety or welfare of specific individuals or the general public, N.Y. Correction Law § 752(2), provided an independent basis for excluding Hobbs from performing in the park. In support of their summary judgment motion, defendants submitted, inter alia, court records that described Hobbs's prior conduct leading to his two convictions for molestation of children; affidavits attesting to Hobbs's molestation of two other children; and an affidavit and report by clinical psychologist and psychology professor Dr. David L. Pogge, who had regularly conducted evaluations of sex offenders at the request of probation departments and courts, had evaluated approximately 600 such persons, and possessed special expertise in the evaluation of sex offenders and the risk they present to the community (Affidavit of David L. Pogge, Ph.D., dated April 26, 2002, ¶ 1). 51 In his affidavit, Dr. Pogge stated that [s]exual offenders have a high rate of recidivism, and that [c]ertain subgroups of sex offenders have a higher risk of reoffending. ( Id. ¶ 2.) In his report attached to the affidavit, Dr. Pogge elaborated: 52 While sexual offenders in general are believed to have a relatively high recidivism rate, there are a number of factors that have been identified in the scientific literature that predict increased risk to re-offend, and there are other factors that are known or generally believed to reduce an offender's risk of recidivism. Factors that have been identified in the scientific literature on sexual offenders that increase risk of recidivism include, but are not limited to, number of sexual offenses, number of other criminal offenses, non-sexual violence during a sexual offense, history of non-sexual violence, the absence of a familial relationship between the offender and victim, offending against individuals who are strangers or little known to the offender, sexual offending against male victims. Offenders who are relatively young-that is, under the age of 25 at the time of their offense — have been found to be more likely to re-offend. Male offenders who have never been married or lived in a marital relationship with a partner for at least two years are also more likely to re-offend. In addition, the available research suggests that offenders who manifest psychopathic or paranoid personality traits are more likely to re-offend. Offenders who show deviant sexual arousal-particularly where there is evidence of pedophilic sexual interest, and most especially where there is evidence of homosexual pedophilic sexual interest — are also a significantly greater risk to re-offend. 53 (Report of David L. Pogge, Ph.D., Consultation Regarding Mr. Richard Hobbs (Pogge Report) at 4 (emphases added).) 54 The County presented evidence to support its contention that many of the above factors applied to Hobbs. Hobbs had been convicted of sexual offenses against minors twice; both involved his fondling the genital areas of young boys with whom he apparently had no familial relationship and little or no prior acquaintance. ( See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Hobbs, No. 82-10,684, Court of Common Pleas, Lycoming County, Pa., Sentencing Transcript, March 8, 1983, at 19-20 (according to the New York State records of Hobbs's first conviction in 1978, as read into the record, without objection, by the judge who presided over Hobbs's trial and sentencing for his second conviction, Hobbs's 1978 conviction involved an 11-year-old boy who was walking along the street when he was grabbed by Hobbs, taken into an office, and fondled until he was able to break free and run for help); id. Trial Transcript, January 13-14, 1983, at 10-19 (the victim of the conduct leading to Hobbs's second conviction testified that he was 14 when he was introduced to Hobbs; on that day, Hobbs was to give a performance as a clown in another town and the victim was to help Hobbs in that act; Hobbs fondled him throughout the round-trip car ride and at locations in and near the other town).) 55 One of the two affidavits describing a molestation for which Hobbs had not been prosecuted was submitted by a man who stated that Hobbs had molested him when he was approximately 10 years old. That molestation was relatively contemporaneous with the conduct that led to Hobbs's 1983 conviction, and the affiant's father testified at Hobbs's trial. The other affidavit was submitted by a mother who stated that she had entered a room and found Hobbs fondling the genitals of her early-teen-age son; that incident occurred not long after Hobbs had completed the term of incarceration for his 1983 conviction. 56 Hobbs testified that he was 24 years old at the time of his first conviction in 1978. ( See Deposition of Richard P. Hobbs at 87). As of the time of his deposition in this case in 2001, he had never been married. ( See id. at 4.) He had never received any psychiatric treatment or been treated by a psychologist or a behavioral therapist. ( See, e.g., id. at 121-22.) 57 Dr. Pogge stated that he had reviewed the above trial, sentencing, and deposition transcripts, as well as hundreds of pages of other materials concerning Hobbs, including numerous documents written by Hobbs. Although he did not meet Hobbs in person, Dr. Pogge also reviewed some 2 1/2 hours of Hobbs's own videotapes of his performances. ( See Pogge Report at 1-3.) Dr. Pogge opined, using a published actuarial algorithm, that certain of the facts described in the above transcripts — even without consideration of the victims' ages — 58 would be sufficient to classify Mr. Hobbs as a Medium-to-High risk to re-offend and would predict a long term risk (i.e., 15 years) of re-conviction for a sexual offense of 40%. 59 ( Id. at 4.) And either the victims' ages, i.e., early-adolescent and pre-adolescent, or the fact that the victims were males would further increase [Hobbs's] risk for future sexual offending. ( Id. at 5.) Dr. Pogge noted that no factors known to reduce [Hobbs's] risk for re-offending (e.g., successful completion of appropriate treatment) are present and that as a whole, the available information suggest[ed] that Mr. Hobbs may present a special risk of sexual assault to minors, especially male minors. ( Id. at 7.) Dr. Pogge also opined that 60 [i]f, through his performances at Rye Playland, Mr. Hobbs[] were able to successfully present himself to large numbers of children and their guardians as a harmless, entertaining, benevolent clown, he would then be in an excellent position to begin identifying, targeting and grooming future victims. 61 ( Id. at 5.)