ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly MtgsJuly 14 – Phone (AUDIO),
August 11 – San Diego, September 15 – Berkeley, October 6 – West Sacramento, October 20 – Los Angeles [details]

Conference Videos Online

National

MO: Senate Bill 655 changes the way MO handles sex offender registry [three tier]

[fourstateshomepage.com = 5/29/18]

State lawmakers sign off on a potential law changing the way the Show Me State handles its sex offender registry.

Senate Bill 655 would create a three tier system, similar to the one used at the federal level. Those guilty of the least serious convictions could ask courts to take them off the list after ten years. That option is also available for convicts on the second tier -with more serious charges – after 25 years on the registry. But those with the worst offenses would remain for life.

Read more

 

Join the discussion

  1. someone who cares

    I like the way they say you “could” ask the court to be removed after your time is up. It should be automatic. Period. Who wants to pay all that money to go to court again, provide character letters yet again, pay an attorney, just to be denied if the judge doesn’t like your face or had a bad day. At some point, we would like to move forward and not bother our friends and family who are either elderly now, or you made new friends who don’t and shouldn’t have to know about your status. 10 or 25 years are up, you will be removed. That is the way these Tiered Registries need to be written.

    • TS

      @someone

      You are spot on. It is similar to when you need to opt-out of something because you are automatically opted-in instead of being asked to opt-in. It should be an automatic removal from, but you cannot unethically take money then if people are automatically removed once done.

    • American Detained in America

      Agreed, but we both know that the registry isn’t about protecting anyone, it’s about increasing political clout. This is just another way to inflate the bureaucracy and make it sound like they are doing something good.

      • self

        Spot on. Social bigotry often violates the rights of other individuals who want to make their own choices in life!

    • Crystal

      I think it’s more leaning towards if that person had been caught doing the same sex crimes again in that 10 years or if that were found violating parole maybe.

  2. Facts should matter

    “Supporters claim narrowing down the list would help it focus on the most serious offenders.”

    Wow.. lawmakers really do have high hopes and think big, don’t they?

    • AO

      If it’s anything like the CA’s new registry where Tier 3 includes completely non-violent offenses like possession of CP, they’re not going to accomplish much in helping focus on serious offenders. I bet if you talk to most LE’s, they’ll say that it doesn’t help them much having someone in Tier 3 for CP possession along side someone with multiple rapes and convictions. It’s like lumping together someone convicted of stealing $1000 petty cash from their office and someone who held up a bank and hurt/killed people in the process.

      • David Kennerly, The Government-Driven Life

        Just call me Clyde Barrow! (of “Bonnie and Clyde” bank-robbing fame).

  3. R M

    “Agreed, but we both know that the registry isn’t about protecting anyone”. My question is, what is Mo’s law now? Is it all on the registry for life?

  4. Jim D

    I believe that any kind of change is a good start. I personally would like to see the Holloween law changed. No one is going to wait a whole year to abuse a child. The state needs to do background checks on out of state offenders to make sure they are in the right tier.

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 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 *