ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings
Q4: [details]

Other Events
ACSOL Conference: June 15/16, 2018 in Los Angeles [details]

ACSOLCalifornia

AB 2569 passed by Assembly Public Safety Committee

The Public Safety Committee today passed an amended version of Assembly Bill (AB) 2569. The bill, authored by committee vice chair Melissa Melendez, originally removed an exemption for some registrants convicted of incest from being added to the Megan’s Law website. The amended version of the bill requires the California Department of Justice to interview the victim of the offense and to make a subsequent determination regarding whether information regarding the registrant should be added to that website.

California RSOL opposed the original bill as well as the amended bill in a letter to the Committee as well as in testimony at the Committee hearing.

“Assembly Bill 2569 is predatory legislation that will destabilize families and re-victimize victims,” testified CA RSOL president Janice Bellucci. “The amendment will provide the California Department of Justice with unfettered discretion because the bill does not provide the agency with guidelines by which to make its decisions.”

CA RSOL board member Pamela George also testified at the hearing and spoke in opposition to the bill.
“It’s important that the committee apply empirical evidence and not take action based upon on emotion,” stated George.

The Committee approved the bill by a vote of 6 to 1, with the dissenting vote from Assembly member Bill Quirk who said he voted against the bill because of George’s testimony.

During his remarks, Quirk stated that the registry is “too long already”. He added that he believes that the registry should be limited to those likely to re-offend or who have committed the most serious offenses.

Assembly Bill 2569 will next be considered by the Appropriations Committee. If the bill passes that committee, it will next be considered on the Assembly floor and then move to the Senate Public Safety Committee for further consideration.

———————- Related ———————————–

New bill stops loophole for sex offenders not registering online

From an attendee (from comments below):

I showed up at the Legislative hearing on Tuesday prepared to help oppose AB 2569. Even though all I would be able to do is state my name, city, and that I wished them to vote “nay”, I felt as though by doing that I would help the 28,000 people who would be affected by this bill. While I am not one of those affected by AB 2569, I feel as though an act against one of us is an act against all of us. We have to stand united, it is only through acting as one that any civil rights movement has gained strength.

But they published a schedule that for the day that was overly aggressive, did not let anyone know they would continue the unheard bills the next day, and did not even mention to the crowded meeting the order of the bills. Five hours of sitting listening to the wheels of the legislature grind, only to not be heard. Having been there before, I was aware that much of the process is decided behind closed doors before the committee meeting, but I was hoping for an impact or cause them to reconsider. I took the day off without pay, took an early morning flight, and rented a car to get from the airport to the capitol. I am not wealthy, I work hard for what little I make, and the legislature in their capricious disregard for the voters, demonstrated how inadequate they are. Throughout the day, those of us in attendance and those watching it by streaming video know the Committee stood up for a variety of causes, protecting us from mylar balloons against the huge outcry of retailers, and preventing a DUI blood THC threshold against the opinion of a highly regarded researcher in the field. They did what seemed right, but failed to do what was right for us because of fear of losing their jobs and out of hate.

Janice cannot do this alone, we must all help. It is through our letters and calls, the legislature responds. If you weren’t there, you would not know that Janice was fighting not only this battle, but also was on Day 2 of treatment for pneumonia. She soldiered through that meeting. Not sure how, as I am healthy and it was a long frustrating day in that meeting room for me. If she can do that to help us, what can we do to help ourselves and help her in this battle? As we move on to the next battle, I hope that everyone that reads this website asks themselves those questions and finds a way, through donations, through standing up at the next Committee meeting, or through an aggressive letter and calling campaign, or whatever you can do to help fight the battle so that we can win the war.

Join the discussion

  1. NPS

    I listened to the broadcast online. It passed in unanimous decision. Quirk abstained from voting, however, it was quite clear he was against the bill stating that the list was already too long. Of course, the supporting side used the “if it saves one child” argument and appealing to the emotions. It worked. I was surprised to hear that only 2 people from the public stood up against the bill. (Of course the pro side only had 2 as well).

    • Friend of RSOL

      Are there any further steps this bill needs before it is enacted into law? Does it have to pass the Senate and the Senate Public Safety Committee? Did it have the amendment attached to it?

      • Janice Bellucci

        Please read article above, Friend of RSOL, because the article spells out the next steps. As the article reflects, there are many more steps to be taken before this bill becomes a law. Thank you.

        • Friend of RSOL

          Sorry – I commented on another screen before reading the article. Thank you and Pamela George for testifying! And thank God for the voice of reason from Bill Quirk!

  2. Orwellian

    What exactly will the “interview” consist of? I can imagine quite alienating questions that Kamala Harris and her corrupt Department of Justice will subject victims to. Like what was said above, it is revictimizing people. Also, seems like a logistical nightmare. But perhaps most troubling, this seems the first step in slowly publishing currently unpublished registered citizens — as there are about 18,000 (very fortunate) registered citizens not currently on the Megan’s Law website. When will the government begin to recognize our right for a second chance?

    • Notgivingup

      Well if this gets passed after going through the (Appropriations Committee. If the bill passes that committee, it will next be considered on the Assembly floor and then move to the Senate Public Safety Committee for further consideration.) The only positive is maybe the 18000 that could possibly be placed on the hit list might chose to join the fight. I doubt it but numbers are the only thing that will ever stop these laws. For the ones of us that donate, go to our state meetings, send out letters to RCs ( at our own expense) to try and get them to join, They might be getting donor fatigue, I know after all these years I have it. I have put so much time, money and energy in my state and the counties that surround me with some result but not what I would have excepted or had wished for. Sometimes I think I should just go back to fishing and gardening which I love until the others get tired of the beat downs. No one bothers me here anyways and I have a large support structure.

      • Notgivingup

        Some may wonder why I care what happens In California, the reason is I go there 3 to 4 times a year to visit family. Know another man that travels there a lot, loves it but hates the traffic. He is another one that does not allow the registry to keep him and his family down all the time.

        • Will A

          Well, these laws/attacks are like cancer. If they are allowed to exist anywhere in the U.S., they can, and often do, infect other parts.

          You don’t have to justify anything anyway. The people who live in California do not own it. Just like I can’t keep them from coming or moving to my state. That is not how America works.

    • Timmr

      ‘”Every time you interview a victim of a sexual assault, you’re essentially bringing on a level of trauma to them all over again. They’re having to relive that experience all over again,” Reinesch said.’
      This is from the article posted in another place, titled “A second Chance for Sex Offenders.”

      • David Kennerly

        The funny thing is is that these are truth-claims which are never subjected to any kind of objective scrutiny or analysis and are passed along as irrefutable wisdom. Victimological claims such as these are like religious claims, which is to say, they are devoid of scientific support. Yet anyone who calls them into question pays an immediate social price for doing so. Indeed, punishment is seen as a necessary response to those who have such temerity.

        • Timmr

          Yes but which “truth” does Melendez believe? Or does she hold two contradictory beliefs in her head? One to convict a person by keeping the victim off the witness stand or the other, to put someone back on the public registry by tracking down the victim and reminding her of the crime again?

  3. Lake County

    Damn, I tried to watch it but could not find a link to this hearing. I guess we will have to try harder at the next hearing. So now they’re going to open up old wounds by interviewing victims in what might be very old cases. Looks like they’re opening a big can of worms with this. I suppose if the victim no longer is living with the offender, then offenders will be automatically added to the public list. I wonder who is going to be paying for all this? Does anyone have the stats of how many people are exempt from listing now?

  4. Joe

    I also listened to the hearing. Some thoughts…

    1. First and foremost, thanks to Janice for fighting the good fight. She probably has better things to do than hang around Sactown for days, for 120 seconds behind the microphone. A big shout out to the other person (Ms. George) who spoke, and spoke so well. Not only was she the only person who pointed out that this exclusion only applies to those family members who are convicted of minor transgressions, she also singlehandedly swayed Assemblymember Quirk to abstain from voting (not a ‘no’ vote – such abstention is cowardly and should not be allowed – he should either vote for or against, but we’ll take it).

    2. Assemblywoman Melendez introducing this bill WITHOUT mentioning that this exclusion that she is gunning for only applies to those family members convicted of non-penetrative conduct that resulted in probation. Omitting this fact is tantamount to deliberate deceit.

    3. The speakers in support of the bill with heart-wrenching testimony that had NOTHING to do with this bill, as it affects only those with non-penetrative conduct resulting in probation. Either of those women’s abusers would not be eligible for this exclusion in a million years. Why are they allowed to speak on unrelated matters – for what certainly seemed a long 120 seconds each???

    4. Citizen participation – the bill being discussed contains amendments that are NOT available to the public. How can a citizen participate in the process when they are not provided the issues at hand in a timely fashion? And as Ms. George stated, postponing the discussion to the following day is a sure fire way to suppress the voice of those willing and ready to contribute. California is a big state and who has time not only to travel such possible distances, but to stay indefinitely? Past bills have had up to 2 dozen citizens voicing their opinions and impacting the bills passage or not. This delay ensured that none were present.

    5. The amendment… it is not available to the public but apparently the DOJ will be required to interview the victim before considering an exclusion. As Janice pointed out, there are no guidelines or standards. Will this depend on the experience and the mood of the interviewer? What if a person’s case was reviewed by a DOJ employee with an unhappy childhood themselves? There the devil is in the details.

    There was also reference to ‘interviewing the child’. Does that mean the bill is not retroactive? Again, as Janice pointed out there are people effected going back 50 years.

    Most importantly – WHY??? A victim, any victim of crime, is absolutely entitled to justice. They are represented by the tax payer funded DA’s office and are an integral part of the prosecution and quest for justice. Their role as victim ends with sentencing – at which point they are entitled to present a victim impact statement in order to influence the sentence.

    The Megan’s Law web site in particular and the sex offender registry in general are strictly instruments of Public Safety – as we are often told. A former victim is NOT an expert on public safety. Any input they may have is one based on punishment / retribution or forgiveness. Why should their personal opinion be taken into account on policy decisions dealing public safety? They had their chance to weigh in with their personal opinion with the victim impact statement.

    This bill passing, and passing pretty much unanimously, is no surprise. It should also not be a surprise if and when other web site excluded registrants are slowly being listed on the internet. Hey, if you had a 16 year old girlfriend 30 years ago there is simply no telling what you might be capable of today, and certainly your children’s friends parents should be made aware.

    Maybe all of this is a good thing, as at some point it is simply no longer feasible to pretend that this is not punitive.

    • Timmr

      You’re right, Joe, these exclusions kind of mitigated some of the punishment character of the registry and I imagine that is why they came about in the first place. When they start putting everyone on the shaming list, lower level, victims, there is going to be no compelling argument left that this list is not purely for punishment. They are just banking on pure emotion now to sell these bills. I think Quirk is the only one there that has somewhat of a conscience to him.

  5. James

    Shocking, but not surprising.

    This bill will actually be harmful and destroy scores of lives…old and young alike.

    The only good news is that Janice was there as a voice of reason….a lonely voice of reason, but still…kind of really doing God’s work…largely unthanked.

    Most of the commentator’s above puzzle out the badness of this Bill better than I can…but this really is just bone-headed-stupid legislation.

    Good luck to all

    Best Wishes, James

  6. anon # 213046232-23820202-327

    What a waste of time this state is becoming. Especially the so called politicians ! I wish the “Purge” was a real thing LOL 🙂

    Yea thats it… ” Sergent ” …we have to goto ANOTHER STATE to find the “Victim” to see if the want the so called perpetrator on the ML website…So we are requesting 2 first class flights round trip from CA to (east coast sic).. and a hotel and a rental car and 5 days food so we can locate the ‘victim’….just so we can add a name to a web page ! and this is worth it WHY ? to add a WHOPPING 18k names to the ML website ! remember the so called ML List is already “long” and a waste of tax $ so is it cheaper now to add the 18k NOT on the list ? Especially if the the victim resides in another state ! as BOTH of mine do (but im on the list already who cares).. Cant wait till we have our 1st annual PASSPORT BURNING, Ohhh wait that would be illegal modifying or altering a passport… nvm

  7. Frank

    The way I see it. This Bill has nothing to do with “Saving just one Child” and has everything to do with additional punishment. Period!

    Thank you Pamela and Janice for your hard work.

  8. G4Change

    Thank you, Janice, Pamela and everyone else for all of your diligence and efforts.

    Is it possible that Assembly member Bill Quirk is a voice of reason that we’ve been looking for since the terming-out of Tom Ammiano?

    “During his remarks, Quirk stated that the registry is “too long already”. He added that he believes that the registry should be limited to those likely to re-offend or who have committed the most serious offenses.”

    This is big, and hopefully he can be reached out towards in hopes of creating a tiered registry.

  9. Victor Norman

    If a rso took a lie detector and passed would this help

  10. Barb Dwyer

    As I read it – if this is enacted into law – a person with a misdemeanor conviction of 647.6 who was granted exclusion from the website will not be affected. Does anyone know if this assumption is correct?

  11. Unforgiven citizen

    I found this article and confused the hell out of me.

    http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/02/09/cbs2-investigation-uncovers-why-convicted-sex-offender-working-near-kids-isnt-listed-on-megans-law-site/

    The media always saleing fear, backing the Goverment agenda, as the more we’re afraid, the more they can contol us.
    A 290 register can’t work for the State period.
    am I miss something here can someone smarter then me chime in?
    I quess there not done yet. I am sure a politician will jump on this and another bill is on its way. Don’t you feel safer already…

    • Erwin

      The real investigative story should be how this man was able to overcome huge obstacles. He was incarcerated. He was convicted of a felony sex crime. Then he has to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life. Despite those barriers, he goes on to achieve his goals of earning a $77,000 a year job. From further reading of this story, the victim was a 15 year old teenager. Still too young, but remember the age of consent in some states is 16. So this story is a little bit hyped up…..I can understand if the victim was a lot younger but he wasn’t. So if I was this woman who drops off her 3 year old son at the daycare, I wouldn’t worry too much. She should be more concerned about daycare workers given the fact The Mc Martin preschool scandal happened in that very city

      • Eric Knight

        McMartin is, quite possibly, the WORST example to use to promote the idea that daycare workers are more likely to abuse children. Every adult was exonerated, as they should have been. Read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial

        I do realize that teachers and other faculty are far more likely to commit sex offenses against children than registered sex offenders on school grounds, or with students off school grounds. However, McMartin was instrumental in expanding the hysteria of sex offenses to the current day point.

  12. Will A

    Have to say that I do find it humorous that they keep feeling the need to polish their turd. And yet it never seems to occur to the geniuses that they don’t even have a national, public Gun Offender Registry, among so many others. Please, do tell all of us uninformed idiots how this is all for “public safety” and “it’s worth it if it saves one child”. Please tell us, liars.

    I say they should go ahead and add anyone that they want to their list. They won’t protect anyone and will create more lifelong enemies against law enforcement and criminal big government. They can’t have enough enemies as far as I’m concerned.

  13. Mark Judkins

    I showed up at the Legislative hearing on Tuesday prepared to help oppose AB 2569. Even though all I would be able to do is state my name, city, and that I wished them to vote “nay”, I felt as though by doing that I would help the 28,000 people who would be affected by this bill. While I am not one of those affected by AB 2569, I feel as though an act against one of us is an act against all of us. We have to stand united, it is only through acting as one that any civil rights movement has gained strength.
    But they published a schedule that for the day that was overly aggressive, did not let anyone know they would continue the unheard bills the next day, and did not even mention to the crowded meeting the order of the bills. Five hours of sitting listening to the wheels of the legislature grind, only to not be heard. Having been there before, I was aware that much of the process is decided behind closed doors before the committee meeting, but I was hoping for an impact or cause them to reconsider. I took the day off without pay, took an early morning flight, and rented a car to get from the airport to the capitol. I am not wealthy, I work hard for what little I make, and the legislature in their capricious disregard for the voters, demonstrated how inadequate they are. Throughout the day, those of us in attendance and those watching it by streaming video know the Committee stood up for a variety of causes, protecting us from mylar balloons against the huge outcry of retailers, and preventing a DUI blood THC threshold against the opinion of a highly regarded researcher in the field. They did what seemed right, but failed to do what was right for us because of fear of losing their jobs and out of hate.

    Janice cannot do this alone, we must all help. It is through our letters and calls, the legislature responds. If you weren’t there, you would not know that Janice was fighting not only this battle, but also was on Day 2 of treatment for pneumonia. She soldiered through that meeting. Not sure how, as I am healthy and it was a long frustrating day in that meeting room for me. If she can do that to help us, what can we do to help ourselves and help her in this battle? As we move on to the next battle, I hope that everyone that reads this website asks themselves those questions and finds a way, through donations, through standing up at the next Committee meeting, or through an aggressive letter and calling campaign, or whatever you can do to help fight the battle so that we can win the war.

    • David H

      Mark

      Where did you get your number 28,000 will be impacted, please? does this mean they’ll be added back to the registry?

  14. Harry

    I was caught off guard with AB 2569 and was not able to respond to it. Summary of this bill was lacking, this time. I will be back in the bus, next time.

  15. USA

    Well, I’m honestly very surprised that those convicted of incest/or family related offenses could be removed from the web site. Although, I completely understand it. I’m honestly rather shocked at how someone could or would propose this change? First, if the person posed a serious risk, they would re offend and have no chance to be removed. Although, I imagine those not being shown online have been upstanding citizens. I don’t get it

  16. Timmr

    It seems the people who voted for this bill either do not have families or live themselves in very dysfunctional ones. So they think it is fine for one member of the family to condemn another, and by association all the others, to be on a shaming list that puts them all in danger, creates economic instability and creates a state of siege between the family and the world? I think their basic response is to blow apart anything to do with the former offender, the people nearby are just collateral damage.

  17. CA in Florida

    Ms. Bellucci,

    First of all, thank you for your efforts on behalf of all registered citizens in the US. I am a RC from the state of Florida. And I have noticed in the last few years how state governments are running out of control when it comes to adding new “punishments” to all RC through more and more restrictive legislation. I know, I don’t need to go into details since I feel like I am preaching to the choir. I am not fluent in English and my grammar is even worst, so I apologize while I try to convey my thoughts and feelings.

    I recall a line in a movie a long time ago (I think it was Men In Black!), where the actor said “A person is smart, but people, people are stupid.” And people is what these politicians are pandering to. Scavenging on RC by continuing the fear mongering rhetoric’s of the past. First it was the “Injuns”, then the Irish, then the Blacks, then the Jews, the Mexicans (Since all hi panics are Mexican! I know I am Hispanic!) and now the Sex Offenders. In fact, throughout history society always needed a group to hate!

    The more I think about it, the more I believe that we are going at this all wrong! Consider this, going after the government (the dragon) is going to cost you money, time, mental anguish. I believe all we are going to accomplish is get the politicians to gather the troops and instead of accomplishing our goals they would be feeding the fear of the “people” with more stories on how they should be doing more to control these sex offenders. I don’t think that those in positions of authority care much but to keep their pockets lined with power and money. At the end it is going to be a very expensive proposition.

    What if we go after the money itself? How about going after private companies like the Disney Companies, Carnival Cruise Lines, Anheiser Busch (Seaworld) and so on. These private companies are establishing discriminatory policies in which are banning sex offenders and by extension their families from “buying” their products. The reason is the same that these politicians are using, it is not safe to let RC buy our products. Being entrance to a park, or a family vacation in one of our cruises. It is like not letting me buy a bottle of ketchup because I am a RC. There is no law against going on vacation, for the majority of RC, there is no court order that says that you can’t buy a particular product from a private enterprise. I know companies do say they have the right to service, but if a person has done nothing wrong, in what do they based their decision not to sell their products? Or to issue a trespass warning or determine that you are not welcomed here. It is discrimination! I know I felt it when I was the only Hispanic living in a small town in the mid-west!

    We all know that there has to be something fundamentally wrong here, we feel it. Is it infringement on the basic rights of other family member? I don’t know. But something feels wrong to me, when I have to register every vehicle in my household! Besides a lawsuit of these magnitude once presented in a court of law, and once all the true data pertaining to recidivism is presented, could have the potential of making enough money to then pursue an action against the government. I don’t know I just felt it was something I needed to say. Thank you for your time.

  18. Mike r

    Remember having a restriction on a person is denying them a portion of their liberty. And if it is done without proper need to do so then it opens up the door for a constitutional tort and by filing a USC 1983 action. The minimum damages that you can receive $10,000 per defendant and organization. Let’s say it was a parole officer who authorized these restrictions, that would mean that you could sue the parole officer, his supervisor, their local department, the supervisor for the local department at the state level, and the state level department,all the way up through the governor of the state whose responsibility is for all departments under him and you can sue them in both their personal capacity and their official capacity. Easily running the damages up to a couple hundred thousand dollars.

    The other thing that hasn’t been brought up yet is the fact that not only can they be sued, but they can be charged with a federal crime under Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 Conspiracy Against Rights and Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

    Under section 242 it lays out quite plainly who can be held accountable for the attempt to deprive a citizen of their rights. This would include individual legislators and city Council members etc. who pass laws with the intent to deprive a citizen of their constitutionally protected rights.

    This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

    This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens

    “Acts under “color of any law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under “color of any law,” the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.” why hasn’t janice or someone sue these people under these provisions since these laws are unreasonable and are depriving us of our rights without any reasonable justification. sounds like a perfect tort suit to me.

    • Frank

      Mike R. You bring up some very interesting thoughts.
      I’m sure for most of us…just removing the many restrictions the legislators have
      placed upon us would be a huge win.

      But a flood of legal actions against these legislators would bring a smile to my face for sure.

      And if we could claim reparations and receive substantial compensation for these punitive laws that continue down the pipeline, it would be a small victory.

      Just a few thousand RSO’s being awarded $100K for all of this unconstitutional BS would be a win for all.

      Not to sound greedy, but as a retiree on a fixed income, you can bet a nice chunk of $$$ would be a blessing.

  19. Heasdup

    Will this affect people with a CP conviction?.

    I’m not listed because it was a misdemeanor for four picture files of girls that were 16 years old.

    Thank you

  20. Mike r

    that comes from the website sosen the guy has some great arguments I just wish I could afford to bring an action against the government I’m sure we could win in civil court for damages incurred from these unconstitutional laws. even if the courts claim they are constitutional it still doesn’t take away the fact that these laws are causing detrimental effects and that the government is at minimum partially uncountable for therefore they are partially responsible for damages.

  21. EnemyWithin

    On the bright side, those people who are NOT convicted and can still access the fascist and illegal registry of Former Citizen Detainees can now compile a list of young men and women with Mommy and Daddy issues and work themselves into the lives of those victims and those no longer victims but survivors.

    I can tell you from person experience that being in a relationship with a woman who was molested by Daddy provides a giant opening to use her abuse as a tool for her arousal and subsequent criminal sexual behavior that provides the deep emotional bonds of sexual secrecy.

    Now those people who are looking for a single Dad with a handsome son to abuse will have a free and easy accessible list of those Dads and children. It just takes 20 minutes in Google Advanced Search to take a name from Megan’s Law and narrow down the name of an incest victim, where they live and an entire portfolio of their habits and to select a good location and opening to get into their lives.

    Obviously a FCD will not be able to do this because victims, or very few of them, would enter into a relationship with a FCD, but one of the 86% who have not yet been caught, many of them legislators and policemen, can use this new useful tool to sate their deviant desires.

    On behalf of active sex offenders who have not been stripped of their American citizenship, they thank Melissa Melendez for her bold efforts to help active sex offenders find new ripe victims. You rock Melissa, keep up the good work!

  22. Barbara

    I am just learning about sex offenders, so my question may be ridiculous. But, concerning AB2569, would it be too far-reaching to keep those who have a ‘first’ offense or only one offense off the registry? Seems to me this would act as a deterrent against recidivism, knowing that if a person re-offended, he would be on the registry.

    Also, is there any info out there that says that a person may have acted inappropriately one time because of stress in their life, and unlikely to re-commit? Thanks,

    • kelnothiding

      seems to that if that is the thinking , why not the folks that kill people , or armed robbery ? or drunk driving because it kills not only kids but whole fam dam ilys ? or how bout people that feed there kids junk food and give them energy drinks that are killing kids of all ages, OR how about like in most crimes when you keep breaking the same law you go to court and the court gets tougher , rather than seeing that people pay for the same crime over and over again , I think if someone just has one case he or she be placed on the LIST” for 10 years that’s NOT pubic , just the cops have this info , and if they get a new sex crime , then its another ten years as well as the time and paper they have to do , but at some point IF” they eather stop doing it then leave them alone , but what I don’t understand is that how come a person can go out and kill people , do there time , and go live there life anywhere they want , same with the folks that kill people drunk driving or road rage , speeding in school zones , people that go out and beat old folks up and rob them , yet they do there time and all is good ,how bout thug cops beating anyone down they want to , and very few of them ever even get fired , and even less of them ever do any real time , no this is wrong , why should offenders keep having to pay for the same crime or crimes over and over , with new law after new law?? oh well this just what I am thinking and what I beleave , others have on here have better grasp on this than I do , I mean its only been 30 years since my so called crime

      • kelnothiding

        also I need to say that by far most offenders , have crimes that are internet crimes that have novictim , I feel that that all of those should be no more that a parking tickit , lol , as well as some of the other crimes that really there is no victim , these people have no biz having to live the life I have to live , its just not far , because I don’t even think is right that I should have to live this way ,but my case is much worse than many of the folks that have had there lives dragged out from underneath them , and there familys , that is the torcher in life is the fact that my family , my wife has to be dragged through as well as disrespected by people that don’t even really have a dog in the fight! no they just want to punish people , put me in what ever program you want , But put these inter net trolls in the same program as well with me please , and we can hash all this out in a few min! these people burn our homes, keep our kids in fear , and drag our mates through hell , and the whole time they are sweeping every dirty thing they ever did under did under the rug, and for people to feel safer because of some list is crazy, because if you study this matter at any real depth you will see its the people that are in your family or old friends that you know are the very ones you have to worry about , at least that is what most leading studys show ,

    • Erwin

      How ridiculous of you Barbara! You shouldn’t be posting comments like that. You make too much sense and our prosecutors, politicians and lawmakers don’t like that

    • Timmr

      Personally, what you are saying makes more sense to me than a tiered registry based on the Static 99 or on the type of offense, neither of which predicts individual behavior. The registry has been proven to be ineffective as a preventative measure. Maybe it can be used as a sentence enhancement for repeat offenses, as an alternative to incarceration enhancements. Frankly, registration is akin to shaming, and disruptive not only to the offender, but to the society at large, teaching fear and hatred. Nonetheless, your proposal calls the registry punishment, which is where I think we all want to go with it. The tiered proposals still call the registry regulation and are still trying to find a reason for them based on allegory not cause and effect.

  23. Unforgiven citizen

    Since we are taking about circumstances leading to convection. How about a serious of lies by my wifes exhusband of a act that would not even be considered indecent or immoral, then you add threats by a hero complex social works they will remove all of your children from your home and you would never be allowed to see them, furthermore add being told if you take it to trail it would traumtize your family further, Add a public defender on top of that and being told once I complete probation I can apply for certification of rehabilitation and reduced my sentence to a misdemeanor and apply for exsupugement making it all sound like a temporary set back to keep family together right, so I take a plee and it will all be over. Nope the law changed after the fact so I can’t clear my record, ok I’ll live with that, but then came Megans law and thank God one year later the law was amended as my case was minor offence was granted mercy and removed from the DOJ web site (still have to do my annual which is really what the 290 was about police only) trust me i know first hand what that web site does as the one year i was on it, cost me my home, my job, my life. I was able to bounce back once i was granted exclusion but nope i am not allowed to have peace they are not done now they just want to destroy my life completely and force my family to live it all over again after 28 years have passed with not once seeing the inside of a court room, so you tell me it’s not cruel and unusal punishment, ex post facto or puntive or what ever f×#/=@ thing the system will denied they’re not doing in the name of public saftey … Don’t even get me started with IML as that’s just one more nail in my cofin.
    One day they are going to push to fare and someone is going to make head lines, reading pandering polician karma catchs up to them. Bang bang

    • kelnothiding

      Unforgiven ,, I feel you in a big way , I know all bout these off the chain hero social workers , we had to deal with those freaks , but you case kind of sounds like this guy I did time with, he was one of the guys that was trying hard befor he cot time , and never did stop , but his ladys ex came along and really did a number on there life, , that was a long time ago but I can still see and feel the wreck left behind as well as still going on ,its time for a real vacation , lol

  24. Roger

    I was at the AB 2569 hearing and I gave a public opinion against it. Janice was amazingly tenacious–continuing the fight into a second day even being sick. I was proud to be part of the little team who stood up for what is right, even though it cost us time and gas money that for many of us is a hardship. We didn’t get 100% of what we wanted, but we fought, and the politician notice.

    Please consider joining us at least once at a hearing in Sacramento, even if you just watch. Taking a couple of days off work to fight with us will open your eyes to how the system works, and let you see how every voice counts. The politicians were so used to passing anti-RC laws unopposed that they were amazed we pushed back last year.

    If you can’t come to Sacramento, please show your appreciation for Janice’s efforts by donating a few dollars to help cover part of Janice’s transportation and hotel costs. And write letters when Janice sounds the alarm.

    We are all in this together.

    • James

      You know Roger, your positive words move me…I’m terrified of going to Sacramento, but, whatever the next hearing is…I will try to be there, (if possible)

      Thank you for being there for all of us.

      Best Wishes, James

      • Roger

        I was terrified too, until I realized
        (1) I had to stand up if I wanted to stop the legal beatings we RCs have had for years, and
        (2) Hardly anyone else was able and willing to do it (just a few RCs out of 130,000+ came to that hearing).

        My anger at being whipped by outrageous laws for years overcame my fear. To my surprise, having stood at the mike and given a 5-second comment(my name, city, and “I oppose this measure”) about 6 times now, I am no longer afraid. Making a comment is calm and orderly. No one yelled at me, disrespected me, or threw tomatoes at me. It is empowering to realize a simple, short comment at hearings can positively impact the lives of 130,000 of us.

  25. Eric Knight

    How will they deal with sex crimes that do not involve actual victims, but rather through Internet-based sting operations? In addition, what about child pornography crimes that do not involve identifiable victims?

  26. ThoughtasWeak

    They want to get feedback from the victim, yet when the victim tells them something they don’t want to hear, they respond that they are “required to take it into consideration, but they don’t have to abide by it.”

    My daughter will be subjected to harassment, bullying, vandalism, etc. all due to the fact that she is related to her abuser, but they don’t care about her. Her abuser went to prison and isn’t eligible for exclusion. But, they only care about her, as long has she tells them what they want to hear.

  27. Regina Navarro

    If the victim is a liar of the whole event, then they are only considering LIES.

  28. Regina Navarro

    BTW We live in a society and not a cubicle. Kids are everywhere! It is so easy to violate just based on the conditions they place on you with violations of probation/parole. I am not a registrant but I feel like one since I have family members on this list. It never ends. When a light is seen down the tunnel it can go dark right away. Allegations can be contrived just based on your status. If you are on a website, you have to duck and cover from just being a target. They win just because you have so little with so much to lose. I am exhausted from all of this. No jobs for them means I have to work harder with less and less. My body is not that strong anymore. I am exhausted from all of this. Sorry I know I am just ranting away but that is how I feel. I appreciate all of you.

  29. Unforgiven citizen

    [AB2569] recorded 2016-05-11 update
    In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. Suspense file.

    For those who are effect my this new bill here is the status, my laymen understand of what this means is it can be a good thing, however its anyone’s quess until time had passed. It’s a financial and political move, meaning it could die and no politician is associated with the death…

  30. Unforgiven citizen

    [AB2569] recorded 2016-05-11 update
    In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. Suspense file.

    For those who are effect my this new bill here is the status, my laymen understand of what this means is it can be a good thing, however its anyone’s quess until time has passed. It’s a financial and political move, meaning it could die and no poltician is associated with the death…

  31. Concerned mother

    With the upcoming election, and the potential for this bill and others to come to a vote later this year and the future, does anyone know the best way to determine best candidates to vote for? Is there a way, this site could post it’s endorsements?

    • Timmr

      Concerned Mother, it is happening now, I am part of a group of registrants and supporters that is working on a website that will make such political information available to empower us to influence the political process. We could use some help, such as making phone calls, data entry, writing, mailings or computer programming.
      Please see our web page at http://campaign-builder.org/ or contact me directly at timmr109@gmail.com.

      • Concerned mother

        Great! Thank you. I will check it out. How can we post this link for more people to see?

  32. Unforgiven citizen

    Timmr- I would like to help you with any political agenda to support and education.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *