ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459, Time: 5 pm PT

Monthly Meetings

Q3: 7/15 in Berkeley, 8/12 by phone, 9/16 in San Diego [details], Q4: 10/14 in Los Angeles

ACSOLCalifornia

Consideration of Tiered Registry Bill Delayed (SB 421)

Senator Scott Wiener, author of the Tiered Registry Bill (SB 421), has waived presentation regarding that bill on May 15, the original date on which the Senate Appropriations Committee was scheduled to consider the bill. Due to this waiver, SB 421 will be placed in the committee’s Suspense File and will not be considered until May 25.

According to staff in the office of Sen. Wiener, there is uncertainty regarding the estimate cost of implementing the Tiered Registry Bill. The estimated cost is expected to be revealed in a Budget Committee analysis which has not yet been completed.

“A tiered registry will save taxpayer dollars as well as increase the safety of taxpayers’ lives,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “It is our hope that the Appropriations Committee will consider future savings — of dollars and lives — when it reviews the Tiered Registry Bill.”

Join the discussion

  1. New Person

    Maybe there are people behind the scenes that want to keep that cost high because it’s job security for them.

    unless… it’s the cost for running the courts to get registrants off the registry. There’s that.

    • Harry

      I am curtain that there will be a filing fees for petition, and that fees pays for court cost.

    • Anonymous Nobody

      This cost issue is simply a different angle on one point I have made about why this bill is a terror to us, not a hope. This cost is for building a big lobby to fight us tooth and nail going forward and that will guarantee that registration will never be able to be eliminated or even significantly reduced. Too many people’s careers will be dependent on it once we build this big lobby, which they expect to take them a year of effort just to do all the hiring and get things off the ground. It will be like the prison lobby. This is only one reason why this bill is the worst thing possible for us.

      The politicians out there are now saying registration is broken. Yes it is, in fact, it is a lot worse than simply broken. But this fake tier bill is NOT the solution, it is only completely pulling the rug out from under us.

      An honest tier bill could be a step in the right direction, but this fake one that is not even real tiers is the worst thing that could happen to us — and without even assuring that people will actually get out from under registration when they meet their tier mark. All they get for that is to apply for a COR, which is all these tiers are, like they do now and at similar time points. I say a COR because they have specifically written into this bill the standards of a COR as being required to be met in order to get the relief if you are taken to a court hearing.

      And this big lobby that is to be hired will never let us do anything to make it right, because that would mean loss of their jobs. The only right thing is that when you meet you tier, registration is over, not some further review and based on BS evaluations and at the level of a COR.

      • KM

        This bill is very different than a COR. With a COR you have to prove eligibility. This bill gives you the right to end registration unless the DA can prove you’re a threat.

        • AlexO

          That’s pretty much the same as COR. Both the tiered bill and COR require you to wait X period of time and then petition the court with proof that you’ve meet all the requirements.

          The main difference between the two is that with COR you need to have your record expunged first, which is nearly impossible to do if you did prison time. The tiered bill doesn’t care about that.

          • Anonymous Nobody

            You do not need to have your record expunged for a COR, although that certainly would only help your case. In fact, in past decades, the case was that you could not even apply for a COR if you already had an expungement, as the expungement did all and more than the COR. The expungement was sometimes called “statutory rehabilitation.”

  2. jclaser

    I had a feeling something like this was coming…

  3. Joe123

    And the cost as well as danger of spreading police resources to monitor tens of thousands of people who present no danger to the public? Where is that immediate consideration?

  4. Aero1

    Is this good news or bad news ??

    • CS

      You gotta assume, being The special people that we are, almost everything is bad news. :/ just saying

  5. jo

    It will also put thousands back to work by lifting the burden of the registry and letting them be able to get real jobs! It will also ease the burden of thousands having to register, saving the State untold man hours in registration and admin hours.

  6. j

    So now it’s on the suspense file, so what if no one picks it up? so what if theres no author to present the bill?? does it move forward? is it on hold until further notification?

    • Nondescript

      It’s not in the suspense file and there in no indication that Senator Wiener has divorced himself from this bill.

      [Appropriation Committee Rules:
      All bills with a fiscal impact in any fiscal year of $150,000 or more (any source fund) will, by a majority of members present and voting, a quorum being present, move to the Suspense File. “Fiscal impact” includes all fund sources. In addition, any bill in which the primary purpose is to create a task force, commission, work group, a report or a study, will move to the Suspense File. ]
      That it has been delayed for consideration may be a good thing. If they want this bill to pass it will have to be presented as fiscally responsible while being a benefit to the community to the appropriations people. One of the reasons California is not SORNA compliant was because of juveniles being put on the registry and the cost to fully implement.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if the author amends this bill after the budget analysis and adds fees for registration or petitions. However, considering how much the registry currently costs this State to keep it going, particularly with the number of registrants being added yearly and that according to the DA it is a “useless” tool for investigating new crimes, the fiscal impact would be negligible over time. Furthermore, California must reduce its prison population because the United States Supreme Court said that the crowding caused unconstitutional medical and mental health care in the prisons.(and I wonder how many “failure to register” violations are pushing that number up! )

      I personally don’t believe politics is as transparent as they want the public to believe. Just watching the hearings myself gives me the sense that these politicians are not making a spontaneous decision whether to approve or disapprove of a bill while being broadcast on t.v. I think a lot of negotiating takes place behind closed doors prior to their public hearing.

      • Roger

        Nondescript, good points. It is ok to bring up issues and things we don’t like. But there are some of us who refuse to support the tiered bill even when ACSOL officially supports it, and troll this website with nonstop negativity.

        To those people: I hope that you can see the big picture, which is that first priority is to get some kind of tiered registry–like almost all other states. Until then, very few get off the registry.

        It would be idealistic, magical thinking were I to refuse to support a bill and insist on waiting for a perfect, just tiered bill because it doesn’t meet my personal needs. Calif has the oldest registry in the nation, so no politician is going to stick his neck out by pushing for a tiered registry that has liberal concessions to registrants.

        Also, it would be selfish thinking if I, as a tier 3, wanted to keep the 90,000+ tier 1s and 2s on the registry for life to keep me company.

        We have to start with something that lets some people off, then incrementally gain the public trust as they see there is no expected spike in former-registrant crimes occurs. They they would be more willing to incrementally improve the registry.

        That is a strategy based on the reality of how people think and feel, not a fantasy of unrealistic expectations.

  7. G4Change

    It’s as if they’re saying, “WHOOPS, we started this wildfire. Now, do we have enough money to put it out, or should we just spend money to keep it burning.”

    Morons!!!

  8. deegoh

    I guess I will stand alone in terms of optimism. Janice and so many others have put their collective time, energy and reputation on the line for us all, rather deserved or not. This bill is as important to me as the rest of you, but I will not concede to defeat. People, we must be realistic, to the public and many lawmakers, this is not a popular bill; certainly you should anticipate a few snags. What ever comes easy? In the meantime lets pick up the phone and make calls, lets write to those that has influence. One way or the other I will be removed from this registry, rather the bill pass or not. Now, I am a praying man, and I do believe that this is the right time for God to pass the bill. When it does go through, will we live exemplary lives? I hope so.

    • Harry

      I am going to join, you deegoh, in the spirit of optimism. This bill is not a popular bill among curtain company, however, this could be a maneuver to keep it out of their hysterical public, knowing and give it a real chance of passing. If they are taking their time to crunch real good numbers, showing real savings the Appropriations Committee can defend its passing on this reason, alone. Also, May 25 will put the bill at the end their sessions and separate from SB26.

    • Eric

      Well said, lawyers know that timing is important. If the knew some aspect of it was rushed or something wasn’t solid it could fail. So better to polish it, be sure, before going forward.

    • With you.

      @deegoh
      Though not a resident of the Golden State, I am in complete agreement with you. Optimism–hope–is sometimes all we have. Any improvement, even incrementally, is still a shift in the right direction. It’s long been said that perfect is the enemy of good. IOW, don’t throw away progress in pursuit of perfection.

      Like you, I have been praying for judicial wisdom and legal changes in our favor…and will continue to do so. God’s plan will become apparent someday, and I think He’s already giving us peeks into it!

      –AJ

    • Mark

      Good Attitude deegoh and Harry…

  9. Matt

    This isn’t about money. it’s about politics. Anybody who sponsors this bill, or supports it in a vote, becomes an easy target for campaign ads. Can you imagine the campaign commercials from their opponents on the next go-around? This is why I continue to believe our only realistic chance at change is at the court level, not the legislative level. Politicians care about keeping their jobs just as much, or more, than any of the rest of us. They know they are taking a risk by supporting anything that appears to make them sympathetic to the lepers of our time.

    • Thoughtasweak

      Matt,

      This bill has a lot of political cover to protect any politician’s assets when voting in favor of the bill. It has support from LE and DA’s, it had the support of LGBT and victim advocate group. Any politician can stand behind those groups to save their political career.

      I’ve been to the capital many times, and when this bill was introduced in previous years, many politicians said they could not vote in favor of the bill unless it had backing by LE and even victim advocate group.

      • Timmr

        The law enforcement/victim advocate cabal is beginning to see the precious investment in scare politics blooms like a Ponzy scheme, now threatening to bankrupt society morally and economically, and the public panic is already beyond their control, subverting law and order, producing homelessness and desperation and creating victims by registering children and breaking up families, diverting money from fighting crime to nannying registrants. So they need to whack down what they had sown. But the wretched moral panic has already bolted to seed and fear of sex offenders will continue to be propogated by the media. That is the dirt this retched weed springs from. That is where they need to aim their weed wacker — at those lies. But they will find themselves in an awkward position knocking down some of the lies they once nurtured, but keeping enough of ‘frightening and high’ to ensure fear so the system survives. Oh, what a balancing act. Who will see them as credible? It is easier to feed emotion than to put a fear hungry population on a diet.

  10. TG

    It’s possible that the author is getting cold feet. He was getting some extremely negative feedback. It couldn’t hurt to call or write his office and express your support:

    Sen. Scott Wiener
    State Capitol, room 4066
    Sacramento, CA
    95814-4900
    916-651-4011

  11. Jesse

    Hi I am Jesse and accepted a plea in 1999 I was told I would get probation but it did not go the way it was supposed to, (We all know how manipulative the law and government is and how they use all things positive and negative to there advantage.) Suffice it to say after being lied to and serving time I was about to be paroled when finally they told me I can appeal it but if I did I may have to start all over again. Well I got out on parole completed my parole with no problem. and after being off parole for 10 years I moved to Oklahoma where I am not required to register by law , However because I am still on the registry in California ( Just because you do not have to register online does not mean you are not a registered offender ) and even though I am not required to register I still have mega problems because as a registered offender in any state when appartments do background search they still see that you were registered; and not from legal sites but instead from secondary sites which do not update there information . So even if you are not required by law to register and you are taken off of the registry please do not think it gets easier all of a sudden it does not I still cant get a job or an apartment or a life. If somehow this law passes I hope for the best but expect the worst and even though there are so many people who are so great in trying to help us it is a long time coming before we see a real end to this Ostracizing . We live in a society that has to have a scapegoat to make themselves feel better about themselves. or politicians who create new laws in an effort to have people see them as hard on crime and win sympathy votes. I believe this bill is a start to a better way but for all those who think because you can get off the registry does not mean you will . I’ll bet for the next 5 -10 years after this bill goes into effect you will find that less than 1_10% of the people eligible will actually get off . I do not mean to be a pessimist but lets do a reality check here do you think that because the bill goes into effect that they are going to take you off because you are eligible well ask your self how does it benefit society if you are taken off and if it does not , well… History is bound to repeat itself. ie bond servants slaves 500 years african slaves several hundred years gays etc etc all it shows is society does like to have some one to blame ….IMO= In My Opinion. PC 288 L & L touching may the God I know show love to all of you who seek help and I hope my opinion is helpful not hurtful .

    • AlexO

      I myself am planning on changing my last name once I’m able to get off the registry for the reason you named. It’s not the official sources that are the problem, but all those 3rd party websites that grab this information and let it live forever. I figure if I have a different name, than anyone trying to simply Google me won’t comeback with negative results form those sites.

      • Jesse T Neill

        That would be good accept that changing of the name does not help when you have the same social security number which is needed for both jobs and housing.

        • AlexO

          Right. So a proper background check will reveal all the appropriate legal status but it Google search will not. That’s all I’m worried about. I don’t need people simply Googling my name and having it come up with those 3rd party websites.

          • Jesse T Neill

            That makes sense but I have not changed my name and i just did a google search for my self and no matter how I typed my name nothing came up. I think it stays on for a while then just disappears as google places others there. I don’t know.?

    • G4Change

      @Jesse: Only answer if you feel comfortable: I am in virtually the exact situation as you. My plea was from 1999. It was to the L&L 14/15, and it is a misdemeanor. It’s the only thing on my record. I’m wondering why you don’t have to register in OK? Is is because it was from 1999 or because it was a misdemeanor? I’m asking because I’m wondering if I were to move to OK, would I also be exempt from registering? Is there an advocacy group there I can contact to find out more?
      You’ve peaked my curiosity. I’m asking these questions for my own personal benefit and not at all to pry into your circumstances. So I hope not to offend you for asking. Thank you!

      • Jesse T Neill

        Oklahoma law is that you only have to register for 10 yrs here . Maybey it is 10 years off of parole but mine was is feb of 1999 and I think it has to do with the specific laws in this state. So I do not know what else to say like the law number or anything but it is as I say.

  12. Arax

    We need to have faith that this bill is eventually going to pass! We all know that this is a taboo subject and affects all politicians and courts- someone mentioned that change would have to come from the court level. DA and judges in the courts are also elected and also subjected to political backlash from the public during elections.
    We just have to keep SHOWING UP and WRITING and CALLING! This will PASS

  13. CA

    To be perfectly honest, I truly believe that even if the bill made it all the way to the governor’s desk, that he would veto it!
    Not trying to be negative , just realistic

    • Lake County

      Of all the Governors CA has had, Jerry Brown is the only one I think that would sign this bill. Plus, after 4 terms now, he won’t be running for Governor again, so he won’t have any political consequences by signing this. He is our best bet.

  14. USA

    I personally think the bill will pass! The Governor of Ca is rather liberal. It’s a no brainer. Plus, it’s a pretty fair bill . Let’s remain positive! The big issue will be the courts. Having to go to court to get off the Registry will overburden the courts. The bill should just allow you to fall off if you meet the parameters! Otherwise, unless the DA can say you have been re arrrsted numerous times etc, it’s a no brainer!

  15. Tired Of Hiding

    Is anyone really surprised…I mean, really? Be honest…sure it’s nice to think something good could happen but fantasy is all that is.

    Why would you possibly think that something could really happen to allow you to have your life back…nonsense.

    The government owns you and it is FOR LIFE.

  16. Timmr

    Sorry to be a downer, but this bill or any bill or court case is not going to save you. It’s too big now. You have to drop out go somewhere nicer if you can or make fighting this stuff your life.
    I’m torn between hiding under a rock and fighting with anything I can throw, all the while dreaming of relocating to a country that doesn’t hate me and I can forget all this.
    Thing is, no oppressed group was ever saved, save by their own hands through sacrifice. That’s a hard lesson, but true.

  17. ExpatRFSO

    This bill if it becomes law will safe the state tens or hundreds of millions in the long run. They must see that.

  18. TG

    Guys, I understand the cynicism about this bill, but remember that Janice – who is a lawyer with a law degree and everything – has said that this bill would help many if not most registrants. So while venting on this site should be encouraged, let’s leave the analysis of the bill – and predictions of its effectiveness – to the legal professionals, shall we?

    • Daniel

      What’s the point of the comments section then if not to give us the opportunity to read one another’s input? Personally, I’ve learned a lot from reading the observations of others in the bill’s text that doesn’t require one to have a law degree, but simply a proficient mastery of the English language. While SB 421 is definitely imperfect and lots of it doesn’t make sense, I am just hoping the end result will be good (even though after reading the bill many times, I do think tiered registry, as it’s written, has the potential to complicate matters for many in the future).

      • TG

        As I said in my post, input is great, but I’m asking us all to leave the technical legal opinions to Janice. Such as which of us certain bills and laws will hurt or help. I leave that to legal professionals, as should we all.

        • Daniel

          Who do you think you are? I say we continue to express our thoughts freely.

        • Tired Of Hiding

          Seriously? I left my fate to a “legal professional” over 20 years ago and that action is what got me in this situation to begin with! Never never never fail to get a second opinion. I did and I am paying with my life.

          While it will ultimately come down to lawyers representing us we certainly can and should be sharing information and yes, frustrations and musings on this topic that we (unfortunately) know so intimately.

    • New Person

      Actually, Janice wants the tiers to use empirical evidence. This tier of 10 year, 20 years, and lifetime runs contrary to what Janice believes in. Dr. Hanson’s work suggests that 17 year is the max for any registrant. This an expert in his field. So if the max if 17 years, then the corresponding tiers would have fewer years to be on the registry.

      If the tiers followed what Janice wants for years, which is based upon empirical evidence, then it would look like this:

      First, define what a lifetime term is. I’ll just say it’s a hundred years.
      Lifetime = 100 years

      If this is so, then we can transpose the terms from Dr. Hanson’s 17 years max.

      Current … Dr. Hanson’s version
      Lifetime = 17 years
      20 years = 3.4 years
      10 years = 1.7 years

      This tier proposal isn’t anywhere near what Janice has been suggesting by use of empirical evidence.

      Again, using Dr. Hanson, after several years have gone by, then recidivism rate continues to drop. So why even have a registrant petition and have another court decide on how much longer you need to be on the registry? One, that’s double jeopardy. Two, why are the DA and Judge involved if we’re using empirical data?

      These are valid complaints. What Janice wants and what this tiered proposal is are two different things. Me. I don’t trust government b/c govt is comprised of people. The same people who said the registry is regulatory and not punishment b/c of the “high and frightening” false recidivism rate that was never substantiated to come from an expert nor cross-referenced with many other studies.

      I maybe cynical, but we are standing proof of what government can ruin. If you read the 2003 Smith v Doe decision and it’s 7 factors of why it’s not punishment, but regulatory, then you’ll soon realize that current registration laws have surpassed all those thresholds and the research study by Dr. Ira and Tara Ellman proved that stats used to deem sex offenders as one class b/c of an 80% recidivism rate is false.

      Do you see the federal gov’t amending itself? Nope. It pushed the IML. Did you see California at the forefront of fighting this incivility? Nope, it wants to make every former convict to be presented online as well as banish them from schools, even if they’re parents! California also permitted the IML to pass!

      You trust govt to do the right thing by curtailing a wrong slightly and to continue to promote said wrong in hopes it’ll fix itself one day? Why not correct itself instead? The 10 years, 20 years, and lifetime tiers are a farce such that it uses no empirical evidence. NONE. Yet, we’re all here b/c the SCOTUS use false evidence.

      • Anonymous Nobody

        I like you tiers — IF they are automatic, not some BS court hearing to maybe deny you. IF they are an entitlement, like 1203.4 is, which by court ruling is an entitlement. Whatever the number of years for your tier, it ends then, not maybe, but absolutely.

        As I keep saying, this bill is a prosecutor’s dream bill — and we could not be more wrong than to endorse it as we have, especially how strongly we have endorsed it and lobbied for it. We are not going to get anything better because we won’t fight for that, we are saying this is plenty acceptable. This bill screws a LOT of people.

        And your times mostly align with the times of probation — which is what used to end registration.

        This bill is not that, and along with many other reasons, we should not be supporting it. This is the end of things, this is all we will get, there is not going to be any coming back and doing better later. And despite all other reasons why not, it will not happen because this bill builds a BIG lobby of government workers who will fight us tooth and nail like the prison lobby, and spread lots of money around — that’s why this bill is in the Finance Committee and delayed. This bill is DESIGNED to build that lobby, any strategist would see it is one of the more significant purposes of this bill.

    • Jesse T Neill

      There are a lot of loop holes in the bill 1 is that after eligible you must have a Cert of rehabilitation, I ask you do any of you have one of these? They say a lot of people will be taken off this is true however the ones that will be taken off easily are the one who had indecent exposure like peeing on a bar wall or the statutory rapes but any type of serious offenses I have a hard time believing that will happen easily even with as great of a lawyer as we have fighting for us. I am so grateful for these great people helping us but this bill is meant to make the police and judges and others jobs easier by not having as many on the register so they can focus on what they say are the dangerous criminals I suggest you guys read the bill and ask for a non clause for removal when your time is up because well I just have a hard time trusting that any judge or police officer or any one will remove a person with lewd act or any type of crime that was committed on a child 14 15 or 16 would be accepted and taken off the registry.

  19. Mark

    You know, I understand this site is for everyone because “We are all in this together” but it gets really old when there are those of us who face our crisis with hope and faith and courage and a willingness to keep trying, versus those who constantly spew negativity and pessimism. I have 25 years of this crap but I decided a long time ago that I would rather die trying to address the problem and try and fix it rather than give up and complain. Thanks to Janice and company, we all have this site to voice our concerns and yes, complain, but more of us should look to the positive and be grateful for the work so many people – who are not on the registry – are doing on our behalf. The question is “Are you participating in the fight or sitting on the sidelines quarterbacking?” Are you helpless or helpful? I encourage everyone to try and be positive because we have come a long way and we need winners who believe that there is a better tomorrow. Thanks to all those who supportive to the cause.

    • New Person

      Mark,

      I think you’re censoring a part of this community – which is being negative. While there are some negative feelings, it’s important to understand there are several, different viewpoints.

      I see this site as a think tank. While there are somethings you might not agree with a person, there could be something within that opposing view that may be pertinent to something else related.

      For many of us, this is the first step to being helpful. For some of us, this is the only way we can be helpful is by being a part of this community. Me, I’m terrified of LE and the courts. Yeah, I’m that that stigmatized.
      Yet, I still come here to read, good or bad, and still try to come up with ideas. Maybe one of these ideas Janice may run with. In the TV show, House, MD, he has a group of doctors he likes to bounce ideas on b/c he’s stuck. Even dumb ideas need to be run through to prove it wasn’t a great idea.

    • NPS

      I completely agree with you, Mark.

    • Timmr

      Heck, if ASCOL didn’t want to hear the thoughts and emotions of all the people they represent, they could just censor out the ones they didn’t like. I assume they value a diversity of mood and opinion, because a lot of different viewpoints make it onto this screen.

    • Lake County

      I agree Mark. Life is not worth living without hope. I come here to find hope, not to get depressed from all the negative opinions some people make here repeatedly. Negative opinions rarely help any situation in life.

    • AJ

      I’ve learned which names/handles on here to skim, and which to hold in esteem. 😉

      But…I agree, and am going to click that button over to the right (——>>) to support the cause, even as a non-CA resident. Whether or not you’re in CA, this site, these attorneys, are helping to shift attitudes and laws. We gotta keep the pressure applied.

      I’m sure even $0.50 or $1.00 can be useful. Little bits mean a lot.

      –AJ

    • Jesse T Neill

      It is not that we do not hope for the best believe we do but to live our lives with a set of rose colored glasses is not going to make it easier but instead make it crueler to live with if it does not happen. Well I am not an atheist but I will tell you that after 20 years of prayers it is not easy to have your faith. Crazy is when you do the same thing over and over and expect that something will change so after 20 years of prayer with no results just it getting harder and harder what do you expect?

  20. Joe P.

    This bill sucks. Some things that concern me:

    1. If the DA objects, then the decision to whether we are granted relief relies on an elected politician (judge).

    2. Other concerns are the inclusion of possibly being required to complete a CASOMB-treatment program;

    3. SARATSO / Static 99 scoring;

    4. tiers (10 yr, 20 yr, lifetime) are completely inconsistent to empirical evidence.

    The fact that we would need to petition is like adding salt to the wound. IF DA objects, then we have to pay out-of-pocket for psychological assessment and attorney’s fees (as I can never see myself going against the DA alone without a lawyer). IF DA objects, minimum costs could be $4,000 to $6,000. So this bill lines the pockets of lawyers with cash.

    At the end: no guarantees.

    Maybe fixes can be made to make this bill better though. Like making the removal process AUTOMATIC. No “petition” BS!

    • Lake County

      Joe P.

      So you would rather stay on for life just because the DA “could object” to your petition. This is the deal they are offering. The petition process was put in there so politicians would support this Bill and would not get totally blamed if someone later reoffends. We will still be able to support additional reforms and a challenge to the registry in it’s entirety.

      • New Person

        Is there a minimum number of times the DA and judge can refuse your petition? If no, then it might as well be lifetime registration.

        Remember, public safety is so vague when it comes to sex offenders. Since the truth about public safety has been proved to be based upon a false research from a non-expert, we can safely say that public safety isn’t supported by empirical evidence, but fear.

        No government wants to believe in empirical evidence b/c it would ruin the current system. This current tiered proposal isn’t based upon empirical evidence. Well, Michigan does.

      • Joe P.

        Lake County

        You are twisting my words. I never said that I would rather “stay on for life just because the DA could object” to my petition. I disagree with this bill for many reasons, as stated above.

        This bill sucks because it has the potential to put us registrants in worse position. I don’t know about you; but if the DA objects (I’m sure they will in many cases), I don’t have at least $4,000 to $6,000 to throw away at attorney’s fees for a chance to get off the registry. If my petition is rejected, then I pretty much wasted at least $4,000. And on top of that, the risk assessment fees which are at least $1,000?

        Again, I don’t have at least $4,000 for the process. And I don’t think most registrants have that kind of money to take a chance. It would be great if the DA doesn’t object. Then it seems the judges have no choice but to grant the petition. But in reality, I think the DA will be politically motivated to object to many petitions.

        Just like many of the other tiered states, the process should be AUTOMATIC. 5 to 17 years seems to be an appropriate period of registration that is backed by empirical evidence. To have to “petition,” at 10 or 20 year terms, makes no sense; it just lines pockets of attorneys.

        I don’t know about you but I just finished a night shift. I barely make ends meet. I consider myself a pretty hard worker. I don’t have money floating around to take a chance at petitioning. Speaking for most other registrants, I don’t think most have a few thousand grand to take a chance either.

        Petition process should be automatic. Otherwise, this bill can (and probably will) harm many. What I’m saying is this: this bill has the potential to put people in a worse position.

        • Lake County

          Joe P.

          I am as poor as anyone else here. I haven’t had a job in almost 20 years since conviction. I struggle every day to pay my utilities and feed myself. My car barely works, but when it does, I have no gas money to go anywhere. I cannot come up with $4,000 or anything close to that to hire an attorney. But I at least want this chance to get off the registry. This is likely my quickest way out, short of waiting for the registry to end completely. I don’t think my petition will be denied, but if it is, I’ll represent myself. If I fail the first try, the judge will state why and I’ll try again directing my efforts to address those issues the judge will state. For those of us that know how to do research and write well, we will have a good chance on our own. I see that many here have learned how to do research better than many attorneys can do. In fact many here know more about the law than the expensive Harvard attorney I had hired to represent me in court. As this process gets going, we can acquire knowledge from others that were granted or denied relief and in some cases it might be as simple as cut and paste from those successful petitions. Many things in life aren’t easy to do, but rarely is anything impossible if we put forth enough effort. They wrote this Bill so that they can manage the registry better and I believe they intend on making this process work. I’m sure this tiered registry wont help everyone, but it’s a good first step to introduce reforms that could show everyone that we can be reformed and be productive members of society again. We have a long way to go to show society that sex offender hysteria is based only on myths. Just quoting statistics will never be enough to prove that the public registry serves no purpose.

      • Jesse T Neill

        They are not offering us this deal we are fighting for A DEAL do not think for one minute they are giving us something . I understand hope and the want to have faith and I am in no way bashing that . However please do not live under a rock and say our negative opinions don’t matter we have been fighting the same thing for 20 years and where it is now is what we have or have not achieved. Do you think because you just got out or because we have a great lawyer that all that is going to change by the stroke of a pen? The slaves were freed by Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863 and still a hundred years later they were still segregated states. All I am saying and what I am sure this great Lawyer will tell any of you and me is that although we hope and pray for the best the reality is we are a class of people that most of society consider degenerate and this is not going to be fixed by a single bill being passed but it is instead a stepping stone or precedent if you will to make the fight a little easier

    • Notgivingup

      IF DA objects, minimum costs could be $4,000 to $6,000. So this bill lines the pockets of lawyers with cash.

      Yes Joe that is what it does but every law that is written has the same out come, someone makes money and someone has to pay, Our government and corrupt lawmakers will always make sure they make money off the slaves (citizens) of this country.

    • Anonymous Nobody

      And among the things you left out is that it continues to make a LOT of offenses register for which the Feds don’t require registration. Those should just be nixed for 290. Conform to federal. The public has no idea all those lesser offenses have to register, they only hear about rape and child molestation. And conform to the time frames the feds require, which is a LOT less than in this bill.

      And we won’t even argue for that. I don’t know when we expect to get a better chance to argue for the best, this is the best time to argue for it.

  21. Chester M

    California has the largest registry in the world, mostly filled people who are not a threat to society. If this list grows at its current rate, it could potentially possess as many as one out of every hundred people living in the state. At that point it will be such a massive boondoggle and sinkhole for tax payer money and police resources it will simply implode. However, if this law passes, and the registry is fixed at this point it probably will survive into perpetuity. So perhaps its better that this tumor grows so as to kill the entire sex offender registry.

    • Roger

      Chester, magical thinking like that doesn’t result in registries disappearing or any actual progress.

      I heard the same kind of fantasy argument 25 years ago regarding prison overcrowding (“But they HAVE to let prisoners out because it is so crowded!”), yet the prisons were stuffed way beyond capacity until just the last few years. Are YOU really willing to wait 20 more years on the registry to see if your fantasy of the registry disappearing in a puff of magic smoke comes true?

      When I see comments like this, I assume they are being made by the few rich registrants who can comfortably wait indefinitely in their bubbles for theoretical, impossible dreams to occur.

      But most of the rest of us who are stuck in reality want REAL progress, even if it is slow and far from perfect.

      REALITY CHECK: The ONLY way the registry will start decreasing is to start with whatever tiered bill is created, and PROVE to the public that there is no wave of ex-registrant recidivism, which lowers their FEAR, which allows more CHANGE.

      • someone who cares

        Roger ~ I am not sure what, if anything a tiered registry will do. It might be great start, but maybe not if it will harm some registrants more than they are harmed now? Also, you said that it will finally prove that ex registrants will not reoffend. Well, that is the way it is now based on statistics, but who believes it? IT should have been proven all along. Again, I am on the fence but think, whatever happens, we will continue to fight to get the registry abolished once and for all…

        • Anonymous Nobody

          I wish the tiered registry bill were a start. It is not, it is the end. The reality is that this bill is passed, this issue will not be touched again, this a nuclear bomb. That is not only the reality now, it will be the reality going foreard, this is always an issue in this society.

          • jo

            Dude, can you please tell me where I buy a machine that foretells the future too?

    • New Person

      That’s the whole reason behind the push for the tiered proposal, to reduce the number of people who register – not based upon empirical evidence, but just to get people off the registry… not in an equal fashion.

      10,000 will be off the registry without petitioning. The rest have to petition. Do you see equality in that? And why the arbitrary cutoff date?

      • Roger

        I definitely understand your concerns, New Person and someone who cares. I see the unfair issues with this tiered bill. I also want it to be more just. As a tier 3, I won’t benefit from the bill as it is written.

        So why do I support it? Because it is NOT the FINAL step. Getting a tiered registry like the rest of the states is a FIRST step. Laws change constantly. And unlike a few years ago, we have advocacy groups like ACSOL to educate and share stories to push toward freedom for more and more of us.

        When I focus only on the short term effects, I can get depressed. It is similar to what my Mom went through for cancer treatment: when she focused on the short-term discomfort, it depressed her. But when she focused on the potential benefit of survival, she felt hope. I choose to focus on the big picture to give me hope.

        This is a summary of what I personally believe:
        The lifelong registry as it is now is a virulent cancer.
        This tiered bill is the ONLY way START the process towards our freedom and justice.
        Law enforcement will ONLY support it if the bill sounds tough enough.
        Politicians will ONLY support it if law enforcement supports it.
        The public will ONLY support it if the politicians tell them it will not decrease public safety.
        All of these people will ONLY support incrementally loosening of the registry by seeing no spike in sex offenses as thousands of registrants get off the registry.

        Remember, part of the fantasy that lifetime registry supporters have is that just being on the registry makes us magically behave. I know that is untrue. You know that is untrue. But it will take lots of people getting off the registry to prove the basic assumptions of a registry are lies.

        And without this bill, the flood of fear-based anti-registrant bills will continue. We will spend forever playing whack-a-mole. Having a coherent tiered registry will decrease the pressure politicians feel to write more anti-registrant bills. It won’t stop them, but whimsical bills could be fought more easily.

        • New Person

          roger…

          That’s the point: laws can change.

          It was on here that I read that NY extended an additional 10 years to the low level registrants after serving their 10 years to get off the registry. That actually happened!

          No. I don’t trust government b/c it’s run by people and people aren’t all that just. We have stats, but people are still clinging to the false facts that registrants re-offend at a high rate.

          If you’re a tier 3, then I’d be making an obvious civil case b/c you are denied the pursuit of privacy as granted to you by the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 1.

          With true facts and statues that the law is overlooking, why is there a registry at all? That’s the point. The tiered wasn’t based upon empirical evidence.

          We have the Korematsu case as a template that the US Govt not only withheld using other information on sex offenders, but used a falsehood in facts not by an expert to pave the way to view all sex offenders as a disease who cannot be rehabilitated, and thus a public safety.

          Again, with all this information, we’re still viewed as monsters – including this tiered proposal. Why? I don’t see it working well at all. The registry started off that way as well. The NY system did too. I’ve seen too many wrongs to be ideal about this, tbh. I like we’re doing something, but doing something to do something isn’t as productive of doing something right.

  22. Mot

    If there is another financial reason to go for the tiered approach to RSO; over the weekend the Governor propose spending a total of $33,000,000 on legal defense fund for illegals to fight deportation. If the bill will take thousands of us of the the registry then there is the money for the defense fund. Point to make to a appropriation committee??

  23. Daniel

    Depending on underlying crime, a prison sentence doesn’t prevent the ability to get a COR. I spoke to Chance, Higbee, and a few other attorneys who confirmed this when I was looking for an attorney to ask if I am eligible. They all said yes even though I went to prison. Personally, I am in a strange position because while I would be able to get a CoR in 4 years under the current 290 scheme, I would be put into 2nd tier under tiered registry, so I would have to wait a total of 16 more years if this tiered were to pass. Obviously, I will get hurt; but I guess tiered MIGHT help others at the same time? I just don’t understand why the whole thing should be automatically falling off with good behavior after 20 yrs. Why do pre 1987’s get off automatically? The same standard should apply to everyone if this bill were to be more fair.

    • GRR

      I’m assuming if Chance said you qualify for a COR in four years that you might qualify for an expungement now or very soon. I read in the current proposed tier system that anyone who has had their conviction dismissed by an expungement then they automatically qualify to submit for a COR no matter the conviction. Maybe worth looking into.

      Also, when the attorneys said you will qualify in four years for a COR did they say if granted the COR you would not have to register? I do not think that all COR’s relieves registering.

      In addition, if placed in tier two i don’t think it says you have to wait 20 years to submit for a COR just to petition to get off the registry.

      • Daniel

        I was sentenced to prison, so I don’t qualify for expungement. Chance, Higbee & Assoc., and 2 other criminal defense lawyers all said COR will remove me from the sex offender registry. Again, right now all I’d have to do is wait four years to become eligible to file for a COR. If tiered registry passes, I’d have to wait until 2031 …. so obviously not happy about the tierd registry hype. But like I said hopefully others are helped???? As for people lucky enouge to get their cases expunged, where in the tiered bill does it say they automatically qualify to submit COR no matter the conviction????

  24. Mot

    Not sure if this question belongs in this string but…has anyone with an “attempted 288(a)” received a COR? I have a good friend who is a criminal lawyer and he says NO WAY and yet I am getting deluged with letters want to ‘help get me off Megan;s”
    Thanks

    • New Person

      Persons convicted of a felony offense under Penal Code section 286(c), 288, 288.5 or 289(j) are not eligible for a Certificate of Rehabilitation. A Certificate of Rehabilitation may relieve some offenders from having to register as a sex offender under Penal Code section 290.

      But you might want to look for a more recent documentation to verify if the list remains the same.

    • AlexO

      Careful with those letters. They’re generic. The firm simply combs Megan’s Law site for all local offenders and sends them notices. They don’t actually bother looking at what the offenses are. Once you contact them, that’s when they’ll actually look at your case. If you do actually decided to contact the people from one of these letters, be sure that your consultation is free. A legit lawyer should be able to look at your case and see if there’s an actual shot at winning it and tell you as much without charging you. Don’t hand over any money otherwise.

    • Janice Bellucci

      Be very wary of anyone who sends you a letter promising to get you relief from registering as a sex offender. The law currently provides only two methods for this relief: a Governor’s pardon and a certificate of rehabilitation. No California Governor, regardless of party, has granted a pardon to a registrant and we don’t expect that to happen during the term of the current Governor who has been unfriendly to our community. Very few registrants are eligible to apply for a Certificate of Rehabilitation and eligibility alone does not automatically result in termination of registration.

      • New Person

        Janice,

        With what you just said is why I’m very confused. Essentially, you’re saying as a class that we’re not granted the right to pursue and obtain privacy (because a lot of us aren’t given a path to get off the registry). Registration is basically exposing one’s privacy. The California Constitution protects the pursuit and obtaining privacy – Article 1, Section 1. We’re treated as a class, as denoted in the 2000 Smith v Doe decision in its one of seven factors why registry is not punishment. As a class, we are not allowed to move beyond our station (i forget the legal term that starts with an I… immobility?).

        Again, using the 2003 Smith v Doe decision, only those convicted should be a part of the regulatory system. A 1203.4 is a dismissal of a conviction. So according to federal law, anyone not convicted should be a part of any regulatory scheme – yet, in California, you still are forced to register. To me, this is very important when you add the context of the new FEDERAL IML. If we’re being applied to the IML, then why not use federal standards? 1203.4 does remove conviction. It used to remove one from the registry in California as well as called the registry punishment as the reason why people were allowed off the registry.

        Thanks in advance for responding.

      • Stumped

        I am one of those who has been granted a COR along with expungement and I am still required to register. It’s very frustrating, I believed this would open up many doors specially in regards to employment, I applied for a job and even though I had expungement and COR I was denied because I was on the registry. My understanding is that any hiring employer cannot deny you for the simple fact of being on the registry?

        • someone who cares

          Stumped ~ Are you sure you still have to register after getting a COR? I know an expungement will not relieve you but a COR, from what I have learned, is the only way to relieve you from the duty to register. Who is telling you this? Let me know as we are in the process of getting an expungement and the COR is next on the list.

          • Interested party

            The COR paperwork spells out which crimes it will not relieve the registration requirement. I have the 1203.4 and am in process on the COR with the hope that one day laws will change and relieve me of the requirement to register. Currently even if I get the COR no relief.

          • Stumped

            As stated by Janice the simple fact that if you receive a COR doesn’t automatically exclude you from registering, unfortunately I am one of those cases. Check with a lawyer to see if you would be one of them as well or not.

        • New Person

          according to the 2003 Smith v Doe decision, it’s illegal b/c it would then constitute the regulatory scheme punitive.

          btw, did the company actually write down that you were denied specifically because you’re on the registry?

          If so. then I would like to say that 1203.4 (expungement) continues to punish you with such a penalty that prevents you from getting job. Seems odd that there are crimes that cannot qualify for 1203.4, but only registrants are the one who cannot reap in the benefits of 1203.4? Why even give them the option for 1203.4??? This is basically like giving a low risk assessment, but serve the same punishment of the worst offender.

          • Stumped

            Yes in the reason I was denied a job it was stated that it was because I was on the registry

  25. Staying Positive

    I haven’t posted or even read a post in 2 almost 3 years. You may remember me as the person whose daughter was born in 2014 and the social worker at the hospital called in the county human relations department on. My daughter, wife and I are all fine, still together and living in real housing. I’ve even managed to find new, better and better paying work still while complying with the current annual system thanks to the Fair Chance Ordinance in San Francisco that largely prevents employers from using any previous convictions against you. I won’t go into all the details and exceptions but if you live in the Bay Area I encourage to look it up and seek employment within SF city limits. But I digress.

    I came back today because I saw Alameda County DA O”Malley on TV last night talking about being in favor of SB 421 and the Tiered Registry. The report last night made it sound like the legislation was still alive. Then I read here that the bill is in the Suspense File. I learned the hard way back in 2012 or 2013 what a Twilight Zone that is.

    Can anyone tell me simply where SB 421 is today on 5-19-17? And if it passes and is signed into law would it be faster and easier to get off “the list” than if I can successfully complete a COR? For background I pled to a 311.11(a) possession charge in 2011, did 2/3s time on a 5 month sentence split between straight time and weekend county jail with final release from custody in May 2012, got early release from probation December 2013 with concurrent 17(b) wobbler reduction and 1203.4 expungement. I’m currently doing non-profit volunteer work on my own initiative that I’m documenting since June 2016 and that the local authorities know about and have written down in my annual paperwork.

  26. Atheistically Yours

    SB421 is CURRENTLY in the “Suspense File” of the Appropriations Committee. Its supposed to have a “hearing” on 05/25. This is to determine if the cost of implementing this proposed law will be $50,000.00 or more, as appears to be the case NOW! Can the author of this bill PLEASE make the case the amount of money SAVED in implementing it will cancel out ANY “cost” in implementing it?

    What does it take to get Weiner to do this?

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. Feel free to leave your contact info here.
  • 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
 

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

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