ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings [details]
November 2018 Call Audio
, 12/08 – San Diego

Emotional Support Group: (Los Angeles) 11/24, 12/22 [details]

Registration Laws for all 50 States

National

NJ: Area woman wants notice of all sex offenders on internet website

Legislation that has been introduced by state Assemblywoman Amy Handlin (R-Monmouth) would, if passed in the Legislature and signed into law by the governor, allow members of the public to access information concerning all sex offenders, regardless of an individual’s risk of committing additional offenses in the future. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. AJ

    Though not fully clear in the article, it appears the woman pushing for this was dating the guy before he was a RC. So now that he’s perhaps moved on and corrected his behavior, she wants to make sure he’s outed? And how many times has a RC in NJ recidivated? Oh yeah, hardly any…just like everywhere else.
    =====
    “Finally, the bill is unconstitutional. The New Jersey Supreme Court has already declared that Megan’s Law is constitutional only because the scope of community notification is closely tied to one’s risk to re-offend. This bill alters that by providing for blanket notification irrespective of one’s risk,”
    —–
    Those pesky constitutions keep getting in the way, don’t they? Too bad our federal Supreme Court doesn’t have similar wisdom. I really like the concept of “closely tied.”

    • TS

      Megan’s Law offender? Moved up from just a registry movement to actually offending the law? SMH

      This seems to mirror what happened in WA State where the lady wanted everybody listed publicly regardless because someone she knew was on it, but not in the public space to see.

    • Lake County

      So it seem’s that although she was not a victim of this man, she feels that she has the right to track him for the rest of his life. Or does she really just want to stalk him? Or just want’s to make his life even more miserable? What good does knowing where he lives does for her? The registry only tells her where he sleeps, not where he might be at any given moment. One thing about being on the registry, it sure weeds out who your true friends and lovers are. It’s a life’s lesson about friends I will never forget.

      Why isn’t she demanding to know about every criminal that has served their sentence?

      • Tim Moore

        I can understand your offense being public record. Anyone can do a background check on anyone. Same with marriage records and death records. The difference is the registry provides information that goes beyond your record. Your present information is a warning to the public not a neutral piece of information. Once you are labeled it gives people like this lady an unspoken license to treat you with less dignity than any former criminal who is not listed on a registry.

        • CR

          ====================
          The difference is the registry provides information that goes beyond your record. Your present information is a warning to the public not a neutral piece of information.
          ====================

          Exactly. It is primarily for this reason that the registry functions as the modern method of public shaming, facilitates banishment and ostracism from much of society by government, private enterprise, and the public, and marks registrants as outcasts and pariahs. The registry serves the traditional aims of punishment and deterrence in this way, and is therefore unconstitutional on ex post facto grounds when applied retroactively, or on cruel and unusual punishment grounds otherwise.

  2. Lake County

    “the bill is unconstitutional. The New Jersey Supreme Court has already declared that Megan’s Law is constitutional only because the scope of community notification is closely tied to one’s risk to re-offend. This bill alters that by providing for blanket notification irrespective of one’s risk,” Duddy said.”

    So they know it’s unconstitutional, but yet they are going to spend taxpayers money to try and pass this law?
    Let’s hope this never gets past the judiciary Committee.

    • AJ

      @Lake County:
      So they know it’s unconstitutional, but yet they are going to spend taxpayers money to try and pass this law?
      —–
      I took it the other way: the legislators are so clueless (or to use a word a friend coined years back: “aclusive”, meaning “without a clue”) they don’t even know it’s unconstitutional. They just toss out bill after bill because they can, legal standing of no consequence or thought. But if you’re right, this is one downright dangerous person, as utter contempt for a constitution is truly the start of tyranny.

  3. Jack

    Well with that court ruling in place in NJ, I don’t think this is going to go anywhere. Republicans don’t care about the constitution anyway. Mrs. Runner taught us Californians that quite well.

  4. Eric

    Doesn’t she care if she starts dating domestic violence offenders, drug dealers, arsonists, mobsters, dog fighters, and gun sellers? This sounds more like high tech stalking to me. The guy did nothing to personally harm her.

    • Be scared. Be very scared.

      “I would want to know if I was living next door to someone who had been charged with such a [sex] crime.” But …. if your neighbors happened to be convicted of weapons charges, aggravated assault, or gang activity, that’s just fine. No worries there, right?

  5. Dustin

    Once again, what does a person do with the information and remain law abiding, and how does it differ from reasonable caution of everyone else?

    This lady is just nosy and looking for reasons to be miserable/paranoid.

  6. Eric

    Once a person serves their time and pays their debt to society they have a right to rejoin society without undue persecution. The registry discriminately paints a blanket image that the person is still a danger, that they are at risk of committing a crime, and that somehow society knows what they are thinking and what they will do in the future. I had a non-contact offense, yet I am now viewed as a person who will probably do a crime I never did in the past. The registry presents a totally false perception of the person who already completed all requirements by the justice department, that is why we are free (somewhat) to (supposedly) join society.

  7. SCOTUS SAVE US NOW

    https://www.facebook.com/brooke.geringer if any can and wants to comment on her post for this law.

    If you do, politely comment, with facts.

    • C

      You might have warned us about that frightening profile pic. Yikes!

    • Eric

      I looked at her page and she does not seem to be the kind who wants to hear anything contrary to her agenda. She is clearly a scorned and driven women with a single objective that seems to be retribution for some past slight.

  8. Eric

    This woman has some serious issues, her entire FB page is all about this, and endless pictures of herself. She is pushing for this as an affirming agenda. She was obviously scorned by a man and this is her revenge. It is pretty scary that a person can have a personal vendetta made into law. I scrolled and scrolled on her page and it never ended, endless ranting and pushing for this, interspersed with endless pics of herself. A highly self centered and egocentric individual. I hope and pray the committee sees through this, but I am afraid it suits many of their agendas as well.

  9. R M

    Another email sent to this bills promoters.

    Dear Ms. Amy Handlin and Mr. Christopher Bateman:
    As a former NJ resident convicted of a sex offense in NJ, I sort of lived a normal life in NJ because I wasn’t on the public sex offense registry as a level I offender. I was able to have employment and wasn’t a target of vigilantes seeking to harm sex offenders (physically or emotionally).
    It wasn’t until I moved to Georgia where I WAS placed on the public sex offense website that I started having issues with employment, neighbors out to get me and loss of friends and family members.
    Aside from this bill being unconstitutional, please bear in mind that all offenders aren’t the same and most, over 95%, do NOT commit another sex offense (the recidivism rate is very low compared to most other types of crimes). There is no reason why any sex offender should be on any registry much less level I offenders. The registry only promotes a fake sense of safety as most NEW sex offenses are committed by NON-sex offenders!
    Law enforcement doesn’t need these registries as they already have the criminal records to search if needed; the public doesn’t need these registries as they are misleading the public that offenders will always be a harm…,THIS IS FAR FROM THE TRUTH and you know that. Please stop feeding the myths!

    Sincerely, [me] (my phone number and email were included if you wish to respond and I hope you do)

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 refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • 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 or other website issues 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 *