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]

.Action ItemsACSOL

ACSOL Monthly Meetings Q4 2017

ACSOL holds monthly meetings in various locations on a monthly basis throughout most of the year. Meetings are held on Saturdays – starting at 10 am and lasting about 2 hours.

Meetings are open and free to registrants, family members and those who support them. Government officials, the media and all others are not allowed to attend the meetings. Meetings will focus on general issues facing registrants and families, as well as current topics at the time of meeting.

Meeting details for Fourth Quarter of 2017 are:

October 14 – Los Angeles
ACLU Building
1313 W. 8th Street, Los Angeles
(free parking below building)

November 18 – Phone conference meeting
(712) 770-8055
Conference code 983459

November 18 Recording

December 9 – Los Angeles

ACLU Building
1313 W. 8th Street, Los Angeles
(free parking below building)

 

 

 

Join the discussion

  1. Eric

    If you live in the area I highly recommend that you attend one of these monthly meetings if possible. Not only do you bypass any hearsay about issues and get the facts along with other current developments, but it is very inspirational to be surrounded with so many people fighting for the same cause and sympathizing with the plight that so many have been relegated.

  2. Victor Molina

    Why is there so much confusion among employers when dealing with a qualified otherwise truck driver if the applicant is a registered sex offender. My previous employer said it doesn’t matter if the conviction date is more than 10 years old. Is that a legal fact ? Other employers reject that approach and are banning sex registered applicants.

  3. David

    How do I ask a question?
    What code do I enter to “raise my hand”?

  4. jon c.

    How many people have been scored wrongly on the Static 99R? I just listened to the Nov. 18th recording, and was surprised to learn that someone else reported that their Static 99R score was not counted properly. The thing is that my score was not also counted properly … and when I brought this fact up with my PO, they said they can’t do a thing because it’s what the DOJ has. So I’m thinking this Static 99R miscalculation has to be more that two people in a state of more than 100,000 registrants. This might be a systemic thing. But if we take Chance’s advice, would WE have to pay to have our Static scores fixed … when it was the state’s mistake in the first place?! Also, what’s to guarantee that the assessments done by a private psychologist will supercede the Static scores in the DOJ’s record?

    • Static Valid For Two Years!

      I don’t know how the state can rationalize tying someone to a Static-99R score for life when the new Coding Rules state that the Static-99R is only valid for two years — with recidivism halving “for every five years the offender is in the community without a new sex offence.” Look at page 13:

      http://static99.org/pdfdocs/Coding_manual_2016_InPRESS.pdf

      “Our research has found that, in general, for every five years the offender is in the community without a new sex offence, their risk for recidivism roughly halves (Hanson, Harris, Helmus, & Thornton, 2014). Consequently, we recommend that for offenders with two years or more sex offence free in the community since release from the index offence, the time they have been sex offence free in the community should be considered in the overall evaluation of risk. Static risk assessments estimate the likelihood of recidivism at the time of release and we expect they would be valid for approximately two years. For offenders released for longer than two years and who have remained sex offence free, consider their overall behaviour and factors external to Static-99R in your overall risk assessment.”

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 *