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

Janice's Journal

Janice’s Journal: Three Courts Issue Three Harmful Decisions

In the span of just one week, three courts have issued decisions that significantly harm registrants. Those decisions affect registrants’ marriages, homes and overseas travel.

It’s a lot to absorb in a short amount of time. It’s too much to fight at this time. But fight we must in the near future.

In the first of those decisions, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals validated a provision of the Adam Walsh Act that makes it difficult, if not impossible, for an individual convicted of a sex offense to sponsor his spouse for U.S. citizenship. That is because the individual must prove that he poses “no risk” to the safety of his spouse.

In the second of those decisions, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld residency restrictions adopted by the State of Illinois. In doing so, the Court relied upon the myth that there is a high risk of recidivism for anyone convicted of a sex offense as well as the wrongly decided case Smith v. Doe in which the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the requirement to register as a sex offender is not punishment.

In the third of those decisions, a U.S. District Court decided that the State Department did not issue improper regulations regarding the International Megan’s Law even though the scope of the regulations exceeded that law. In doing so, the court relied upon another myth – that individuals convicted of a sex offense involving a minor are likely to engage in child sex tourism or child sex trafficking.

What do these three court decisions have in common? Each of the decisions is based upon the myth that an individual convicted of a sex offense, regardless of the nature of the offense or when it occurred, poses a current danger. In addition, at least part of each decision applies to individuals convicted of a sex offense involving a minor even if the individual is no longer required to register as a sex offender.

These decisions speak to us clearly. The message? We must continue to educate everyone – individuals, elected officials, and judges – about the actual low rate of re-offense and that individuals convicted of a sex offense are unlikely to engage in child sex tourism and child sex trafficking. In order for our messages to be heard, however, we need to learn how to communicate in a different way by “framing our message”.

We learned about the importance of “framing our message” at this year’s conference. The members of the board will be taught how to frame our message at its annual face-to-face meeting later this year. And once the board learns this important lesson, we will be able to teach that important lesson to others.

In the meantime, we will prepare to fight harmful decisions such as the three decisions issued this week. We will fight in state and federal courtrooms. We will fight in state capitols. We will even fight in Washington, D.C.

Please stay tuned to this website for details of those fights so that you can prepare to join us!

 

Join the discussion

  1. Facts should matter

    How can a selectively ignorant, hateful and fearful public be reeducated on this subject when their go-to retort is most always: “I only care about the victim(s)!”

    The climate has become to militant, confrontational and anticipatory with these preemptive restrictions, requirements and guidelines. Megan’s Law is retaliatory vengeance, not justice by any metric.

    • "No Risk"

      The thing with imposing an unrealistic standard such as “no risk” is that *even* for someone who has never committed a sex crime, there is no guarantee that they will ever commit a sex crime. With even female “sex offenders” increasing in population, how can you ever guarantee that *anyone* is ‘no risk?’

      Again, it’s such an unrealistic standard. Heck, even for cops — with police violence being first — the second type of police misconduct is sexual-related. Here is an investigation by the Associated Press on the topic:

      https://apnews.com/fd1d4d05e561462a85abe50e7eaed4ec

      The crazy part is that this sets us up for actuarial “science” (i.e. Static-99R). And the sad part is that even though many of us know that their ‘sciences’ are a fraud, it’s a game that the lawyers, politicians, and even some “experts” will buy into. Yes, it’s “Minority Report” come to life. But the more troubling thing is: How far will it go?

  2. AO

    Thank you, Janice and team. We greatly appreciate everything you do!

  3. Matt

    Here’s how to “frame the message”: There is a document called the United States Constitution. It’s pretty clear. Any person who is subject to a registry of any kind is a victim of slime-bag sons of bitches who ignore the Constitution. Nuff said.

  4. G4Change

    Thank you, Janice, and everyone at ACSOL. We may lose a few battles, but I continue to pray that we will win the war!

  5. matthew

    This is why I urge everyone to do whatever they can to lower their charge, expunge it, complete everything you can to make yourself look better. While it may not be the relief you want as of right now, it may make a huge difference down the road. Don’t look at the downside of everything but rather what you can do now. Its people that give up or don’t push for something that will sink faster than those that fight the best that they can.

    • Bob

      We have to fight together in different ways for our wifes ,children and grandchildren …We have to right letters to our representatives on different levels,go to meetings ,do the same what is going on with immigration movements now,We don’t have to wait when someone will do for us.Lets make a draft letter and start to send it,go to our representatives,make meetings,use media,so be active,Don’t wait months for just one decision on one motion.Only together we can win.Wehave right to speak,to travel, to see our relatives in different countries,go with our family for vacation after hard working year for our money.

    • Bob

      We have to fight together in different ways for our wifes ,children and grandchildren …We have to right letters to our representatives on different levels,go to meetings ,do the same what is going on with immigration movements now,We don’t have to wait when someone will do for us.Lets make a draft letter and start to send it,go to our representatives,make meetings,use media,so be activec,Don’t wait months for just one decision on one motion.Only together we can win.Wehave right to speak,to travel, to see our relatives in different countries,go with our family for vacation after hard working year for our money.

  6. someone who cares

    Come on ~ How hard can it be to stop this insanity? I know, harder than it should be. We have proven over and over that the “high and frightening” re-offense rates are nothing but a myth. When will they have to prove otherwise? We need to demand to see actual evidence that the re-offense rate is as high as they claim. If they can’t provide that proof then obviously, these laws can not be enacted based on what they want to do rather than what they need to do. We have proven ourselves, it’s time for them to do the same if they want to keep this up. They just want to think that it’s not a myth so they can keep coming up with more and more insane laws, but they have to separate what they would like and what they are required to do.

    • ReadyToFight

      They are quick to paint us all as monsters, perverts, and dangerous criminals. We need to be calling all these fake cowards out for the lying cowards that they are and putting Them and Their Families on blast.
      If we and our family cannot feel safe in our own home, then why should they?

      • AnotherAnon

        Suppose someone takes your advice, someone other than yourself, of course, how would the media report it? Who gets the sympathy? What would the reaction be? Would there be a backlash and if so, against who? These are valid questions just based on your comment even if not put into action. Don’t get me wrong, many have probably had the same thoughts, but thought better of stating them publicly and giving the other side ammunition they can use against us. Anger can be productive. Threats against lawmakers families? Not so much.

        • ReadyToFight

          Maybe you’ve never had gang members, and ex cons show up on your doorstep to threaten your home with violence in front of your wife and children. Or ICE agents in tactical gear storm your home all because you’re on a public list.
          I’m not suggesting violence, especially on the innocent family members.
          All I’m saying is if we have to live a life of constant anxiety because law makers refuse to do anything to provide a path to redemption then they should be called out for upholding lies and not upholding our constitution.
          Nor protecting the rights of individuals and their families.
          We’re free citizens right???

        • AnotherAnon

          Thanks for the clarification, especially about the lack of threats against families. I’ve recently come to the conclusion that the only solution is to quit dividing and conquering ourselves. The reason for coming to this conclusion is because every horrid crime puts us all in one basket and the new law applies to us all. Since lawmakers and law enforcement unites us, we may as well be united. The one thing we all have in common is that, I assume, we are not still in jail or prison, so we have done our time. That is all we should concentrate on. I think we need to figure out a way to get contact information of everyone of the registry throughout the nation so we can tell them about sites like this one. Our letterhead might be something like Time Served United. Anyone have any ideas on how to create our own registry list for the purposes of dissemination?

        • AnotherAnon

          Here’s an idea. We steal the registry pages from city-data.com, but it wouldn’t really be stealing because they merely stole the data from public lists. You cannot copyright facts 🙂 Many of those listed on city-data even have current addresses. But how do we find contact information for those whose addresses are not listed? California is not supposed to list the addresses of many, but if you look at the map, there is a tag almost on top of the house, or so I’m told 🙂 Do they still make phone books? Then it would all have to be computerized into a mailing list. Then we start recruiting with a carefully framed letter. The real goal would be to spark entire families into action and to get donations for the fight. I would donate to the legal cause of, say, innocent wives and children abused and bullied by the registry. They need to start documenting that NOW.

        • kind of living

          Good idea Another Anon , to me its aways been about our familys rights !

    • AJ

      @someone who cares:
      When will they have to prove otherwise?
      —–
      Under rational basis review, they never have to. If anyone, including the judge, can come up with even a hypothetical situation, it’s upheld as valid law. Rational basis pretty much equals rubber stamp (only a couple cases of “rational basis with bite” exist).

      • mike r

        I am telling you that is exactly why the Taylor case in CA is sooo important. The SC singled out a subclass of offenders on parole out of the hundred of thousand parolees across the state and stated you are a subclass as applied by location alone and unanimously struck down, under basically rational basis review, CA’s residency restriction law against those parolees. That is unprecedented. I do not believe any court has ever created a subclass of criminal offenders in such a way, and then top if off applying rational basis review to strike down a law. It is incredible.That is pretty much stating that any offender can be sub-classed for many other reasons as well. I would find it hard to believe that the SC would do that with those parolees and then turn around and try to state that “free citizens” not on paper cannot be sub classed in to groups such as: low risk offenders, age of convictions, hell over over a certain age, offense based, many reasons. It is literally impossible with the current governmental reports that for the class of low risk offenders the registry cannot even pass rational basis review under the same standards as the court employed in the Taylor case. If they did not apply the same standards to free citizens in similar ways as I stated then it would be a blatant violation of equal protection that would surely be overturned by the US SC, I cannot stress the point any harder. It would also be like overturning Taylor as well.

        Also, check out these Request for admissions for the AG.
        19. that there is no constitutional “right to know” any person’s current home address;
        20. that there is no constitutional “right to know” any person’s current photo;
        21. that there is no constitutional “right to know” any person’s current criminal records;
        If you guys want to see the complete list of RFAs check it out. Anyone have any specific relevant questions like that feel free.
        https://ufile.io/a97kq

        • AnotherAnon

          What is an RFA?

          Regarding Taylor, I would have thought the law, 3003.5(b), created a class of persons, not the court, and 3003.5(b) as applied was unconstitutional. It follows that it would also be unconstitutional for those with more liberty rights than parolees. However, 3003.5(b) is still constitutional provided it is tailored to the individual parolees rather than a blanket law covering all sex offenders on parole. I think the reason the court affirmed is because the record below was so stout and so the evidence inevitably pushed it the way the went. In the 7th circuit case, there isn’t even a mention of a map. That is why I asked who the lawyers were.

          Maybe I’m missing something. Wouldn’t be the first time.

        • AnotherAnon

          Interesting consequences of Taylor.

          Most California sex offender parolees exempt from housing restrictions

          https://www.mercurynews.com/2015/12/14/most-california-sex-offender-parolees-exempt-from-housing-restrictions/

      • someone who cares

        AJ ~ A hypothetical situation is just that, and if using hypothetical, everyone would be “hypothetically” capable of committing a crime, so should we punish everybody….just in case? The hypothetical situations that may never materialize are ruining families, and there should be more proof than just a hypothetical situation….like….hhhmmm…..evidence?

        • CR

          Unfortunately, that is how rational basis review works. It simply means that a challenged law must be rationally related to a legitimate government interest. That is, the law must involve a legitimate government interest, and there must be a rational connection between the law’s means and it’s purpose.

          In the case of sex-offender registration laws, the legitimate interest is the protection of the public from recidivism by former sex-offenders, and the means employed is to register the offenders and restrict and control them in various ways.

          Note that the means doesn’t have to be the only way or the best way to achieve the legitimate intent. There merely has to be a rational relationship between the intent and the means.

        • mike r

          I see absolutely no reason why low risk offenders cannot be singled out as a class. Regardless the law at issue, the singled out a class of offenders (on parole nonetheless) out of thousands similarly situated and stated from the record before them there was no rational basis to subject “any” of that subclass of offenders to the residency restrictions. Rational basis is supposed to stand if “any” rational applies to any offenders. That is how they get away with upholding any law under that standard. Now just think about what I just stated. You cannot tell me that there is no rational basis to apply residency restrictions to at least on of the offenders in that created subclass. If it is even rational for even one of the offenders then bam the court has always upheld the law on rational review. That is why I am saying the case is so important. It sets a new standard for rational basis review. They cannot sit there and claim the registry is rationally related to any low risk offenders as stated in the exact same type of reports that were used in Taylor that the court took judicial notice of. They cannot pick and choose the standard of review it is either this or that it cannot be both without running a foul of equal protection. It appears the new standard in CA is if you have gov reports stating that a law is ineffective and counter-productive it will not pass rational basis review!!!!!!!! That is it, bottom line. And we have not only CA reports stating that but reports from all over the country and throughout the academic world as well. The CA Supreme Court just set a new standard for rational basis review and no one is catching on to exactly what that means. The frigging rational in Taylor has to apply regardless of the statute………

        • David Kennerly, The Government-Driven Life

          CR, I think that the courts are ignoring the meaning of “rational” in these rulings. “Rational” should never mean “anything you might imagine regardless of its demonstrable illegitimacy.”

        • Tim Moore

          I am wondering if it is a legitimate government interest to have people homeless and then more likely to commit a crime as studies show? Every rational thought can be turned on its head by verifiable information. It is a rational thing to put brake pads on a car, and there is a legitimate government interest in having all cars equipped with “working” brakes. Not just any old block of wood you have around the house, but something manufactured consistently and tested well. But what if the brand of brake pads you use have been known to fail regularly? They substituted cheap materials just to sell them. Do you then say it is rational to put that brand of brake pads on your car, because of the rational sounding statement that brake pads generally have a legitimate relation to public safety? That is crazy. A more strict interpretation is needed when the danger is high like in the car. We all know that is the case and usually try operate that way in our private lives. We asks for a review of the available information. Any thing less is dangerously lazy. How can the courts then be so cavalier when the life of the child supposedly depends upon the regulation that is shown to be flawed? They do it just because it feels right. We should call that more correctly, emotional basis review, I think.

        • mike r

          Excellent reasoning and metaphor there. That is exactly right. You see the courts have never been presented with the actual facts and data in a way that they cannot ignore. The only time they see some relevant gov reports and had to take judicial notice they really do not have much of a choice but to take notice as they did in the Taylor case. I think judicial notice of the gov reports like I provided to the court is the ticket. That s probably why the judge is taking so long to respond to the partial motion to dismiss. If you depend on just case law and precedent alone you rubber stamp that motion that the Magistrate already reviewed. I forgot the judge does take a quick look or even collaborates with the Magistrate before issuing that Findings and recommendations. Wow that means something specifically in my objections to the MFR and/or the request for judicial notice has prevented the judge from just rubber stamping the AG’s motion.
          I have posted a link to my case since it has been a while so here it is all up to date except my RFAs and my request for full discovery that I am working on. http://mllkeys20112011.wixsite.com/mysite
          Oh, and RFAs are Request for Admissions that a person serves on the opposition in a court case getting them to admit stuff before going to trial. They have to be precisely following the rules or they are objected to. The standard is no compound, conjunctive, or disjunctive request, and they cannot ask for a conclusions of law.

        • Tim Moore

          Mike r, I am glad you are doing that, making them do some work and I hope this time they do not take the morally lazy way out.

        • E

          @ Mike r. Thanks for posting your web address. Wow. Can you give an opinion on whether other people can take your filing and duplicate it? Is submitting a new suit in a different jurisdiction proper with chunks of a prior suit embedded in it, or does it all have to be rewritten?? Would you go federal again?

          I’m amazed by what you’ve done. Way to go, knock on wood, fingers crossed. I’ll start checking your site, would be great to be able to track your next due dates on it (not a Pacer member). Thanks

    • WC_TN

      Here’s the thing:

      We as sex offenders, particularly those of us who have victimized young children and teens, are the most reviled, disfavored group on the face of the planet. The low re-offense reality is irrelevant in the minds of our adversaries. What we did was despicable by every imaginable standard. Our judges are human beings too. That means they are parents, grandparents, uncles, aunts, brothers, sisters, cousins, nieces, nephews, etc. ad nauseum. When they look at us, they see someone who should have, in their opinions, been taken out and shot. They don’t want us anywhere near children not only because of what they are afraid some of us might do, but also because of what we could be thinking while in the presence of a child. Think about it. Some states have restrictions that prevent us from being around minors even if the family knows we are offenders with charges against young kids. Even if the family does not intend to leave us alone with their child for a microsecond; even if the family wouldn’t let us put a finger on a child to so much as shake a hand or give a hug, we are forbidden to be around kids. Why? Because they are disgusted by the idea that we could even have a sexual thought about a child we’re around. It’s the “sex offender cooties” they’re afraid of.

      As long as judges can find the most tenuous of reasons to uphold these laws, we can expect very little to change. Only when the perfect, flawless argument is presented; the one that will be so obvious to even laypersons will judges be forced to override their personal bias and go by the law and strike these laws down for the punitive monstrosities they are.

      Also, consider the recall of the judge in the Brock Turner case. Now that an elected judge’s career has been sunk by an angry, vengeful public over a sex offender sentencing issue, we can kiss favorable decisions goodbye. Judges aren’t always content to stay judges. They have other political aspirations. If a judge strikes a death blow to any sex offender law, their political future beyond the bench is sunk. If you don’t think #MeToo isn’t keeping a tab on these issues and rulings, you’re crazy. Now, more than ever, judges are going to be in “cover your own butt” mode. That means fair, honest rulings will be as scarce as hen’s teeth.

      • James

        Dear WC_TN:

        I’m sorry, I must disagree:

        “What we did was despicable by every imaginable standard…”…etc…

        No, not at all. Not me, certainly, it was actually quite normal, as I suspect it was for well over 70% of us forced to register.

        Teens? Post pubescent, no, I don’t see it that way…illegal, sure, punishable by my society…certainly, I am with you on all of that…

        Despicable, not so much.

        I generally bite my tongue when I see postings that put us down hard…I leave it alone. I don’t want to get anyone in in trouble, I value the board, and arguments that could descend from this are not helpful.

        But, ahhhhh, sometimes I don’t see it getting any better for any of us until there is some recognition that what we did, the majority of us…was wrong, punishable…but it was not and is not the end of the world for anyone involved…

        Bad, yes….despicable, No.

        Best Wishes, James

      • 4 Sensible Laws

        Depressing as it is, I think you are absolutely right. A lot of legal prognosticating happens on this website by some pretty sharp minds. Yet maybe all should acknowledge that ‘Sex Offender Cootie Syndrome (SOCS)’ is the guiding force in most legal decisions. Figure out how to overcome that, and maybe we’ll get some fair decisions.

        Maybe it won’t change until every judge has a family member or acquaintance on the registry putting a face on the harm these rubber-stamp legal decisions are causing. Anytime I ever see a favorable decision regarding a registrant issue, I assume that the judge must be personally acquainted with someone impacted.

  7. AnotherAnon

    The lawmakers provided a road map on how to frame the debate and legal filings.

    Making the Case for Megan’s Law: A Study in Legislative Rhetoric

    https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1977&context=ilj

    Compare the current example of the government separating children from parents in the immigration debate.

    • mike r

      Yeah rhetoric has been around as long as civilization and beyond. The Greeks perfected it and actually a big part of any training in ancient Greek included vigorously studying and practicing rhetoric. What is happening today is blatant classic demagoguery plain and simple…Legislators do not legislate on facts or the constitution any more but legislate public opinion personal agendas…

  8. At peace

    After reading this, I have gone into such a depressive state that I cancelled everything I had to do today. I have been lying on my couch and contemplating if ending it all is an option whose time has come.
    It just isn’t working for me, the hoping, wishing, praying that somehow I will get through this. I haven’t spoke to a family member or friend from before my conviction for 4 yrs. I don’t have any new friends to confide in. This site is my only connection to what matters to me and I have almost given up on this, too.
    My therapist doesn’t even return my calls. Just a quick “hang in there” text.
    I can end it now, or keep telling myself that this is as bad as it will get, when reality has proven different.
    Who would ever had imagined that looking at a picture could do this to someone.

    • PK

      Why stick around in a place that isn’t going to work for you?

      It’s true- you’re not going to make any new friends, or land some really awesome job, because the second anyone Google’s your name- it’s curtains.

      Most people in other 2nd or 3rd World Countries don’t do this. People will love you for who you are, not what something on Google says.

      My corporate career ended abruptly after the discovery of my Misdemeanor Offense some 15 years earlier. Needless to say, during that entire 15 year time period, and even immediately after my conviction, I held very decent positions at 2 Fortune 500 Companies and a gig at the Pentagon of all places.

      Once the Sex Offender Cottage Industry of posting everyone’s convictions online, I was finished.

      And now 18 years later- it’s still finished. Thinking that all of this will turn around in a few years- is wishful thinking. It aint gonna happen.

      Face it- we are outcasts of Society. If one of your roommates Googles you and sees that your on a Registry, they’re not going to be interested in hearing an explanation, or your side of the story. They will be looking for a new place to live immediately, and may even go so far as to call the police on you. It’s shocking to an outsider who really has no clue at all about Sex Offender Registries, why they exist, and how they destroy people’s lives.

      • overnotover

        I thought I was in the same boat, my 20 year career was over after my name was all of the sudden reactivated by Texas online in 2013. I had moved from there in 2005 and now having my name googled became an anxiety fused daily churn.

        I was recently laid off from a fortune 500 company and figured I was toast. Never gonna pass a background check again.

        Wrong! I passed with flying colors and start my new job next week

        You have to jump through some hoops and set your self up, but it can be done.

        You have to be in a state where companies can not do background checks on you beyond 10 years.

        That is step 1. Please message me for the rest, because I do not want to post the rest on here. I do not know who reads these messages, but there is a loop hole. Trust me.

        • MessageHow

          Message you how? This forum lacks messaging features.

          I’d sure like to hear what you have to say.

      • WC_TN

        The intent of the S.O.R. from the ground up is to destroy the lives of all who end up on that infernal list. They figure a raped/molested child or woman is damaged goods for life and will live with PTSD for the balance of their lives, so our lives deserve utter destruction as well.

    • Make Connections

      At Peace – Believe me, I understand how you feel. The shame of it all makes you want to crawl into a corner and hide from the rest of the world, not wanting to talk to anyone or make connections ever again. After my situation had settled, and I was release from prison, I contacted each of my family and friends and sat down with them, one on one, and explained to them what happened. It was a gut wrenching time, but after that, even though I lost most of my family and friends, I found that I still had a couple of friends and family members that still wanted me in their lives. I found these people to be my true friends and family – ones that don’t abandon you when you make a mistake. Even if you have done this and no longer have any family or friends, you need to reach out and make human connections – we are after all human beings. There are support groups run by psychologists for people that have our types of convictions that I highly recommend. We only get one life, and we need to try and make the best of it, and having those human connections are an important part of it. Every time I read bad news about court decisions on ACSOL, my wife keeps reminding me … “what’s really changed”? Yes we know that the US is trying to make it more difficult for us to travel, sponsor a spouse for a green card/citizen ship, and get us all to move out to Timbuktu or be homeless…. So what has changed? We need to pick ourselves up and keep on fighting. I realize it is hard to do, as two of these court cases directly impact me and my family (the international travel, and sponsoring my wife). As our numbers continue to grow it is important for us to continue to make connections with people so that more and more people realize that we are not the monsters that they think we are – this is the only thing that is going to effect any real change in the system. Once there are millions of people on the registry… and if those millions can just make 10 connections each we will have the ear of 10’s of millions… and our voice gets bigger. I want this registry to go away as much as the next registrant, but I also think that as more people are placed on the registry, and the more onerous the terms of being on the registry get, the better our chances will be in the future that we can actually abolish it – showing that it is in-fact “punishment”, not administrative as the courts have ruled. I am not going to tell you to hang in there… I am going to tell you to go out there and make some meaningful connections. It will help you feel better, as well as with giving you some purpose and prospective in life. We need each and every registrant, so please get off your couch and start your day!

      • WC_TN

        The intent of the S.O.R. from the ground up is to destroy the lives of all who end up on that infernal list. They figure by raping a child or a woman they’re damaged goods for life and will live with PTSD for the balance of their lives, so our lives deserve utter destruction as well.

        I too keep hoping that one day the registry will collapse under the weight of its own punitive restrictions that are in reality affirmative disabilities.

    • Craig

      @At peace, yes you could end it and then they as in the government and lawmakers have won, no it is not easy and probably never will be but you are alive at this point, try to focus on a hobby you like, put all your energy into your job if you have one, learn a trade if you can, join a support group in your area, attempt to not let the depression keep you down. You need someone to talk with, find a support group. Work out on weights to make your body stronger, read novels to keep your mind sharp. I am lucky I have a family, support groups that are there when I need them, the main thing is live with the life you have now, change will not come for many years so attempt to stay focus on your tasks at hand. Yes this is a pep talk which only works if you allow it too. Our government could care less about us so we are in this together for this life. I still get down from time to time but I have NEVER thought about ending my life, I have people that depend on me way to much. Hardships are a part of this new life we have so get use to it. Been on for many years, been off paper for over 6, sometimes just do not read these blogs when it gets you down.

      • At peace

        I would not be ending a life. A life is what I had, and that ended years ago.

        • Craig

          Well many of our lives ended years ago but guess what, we rebuilt them the best we could and so can you.

    • MS

      At peace:

      I’m guessing most of us here have all been heavily burdened with, at some point in our journey, a debilitating level of hopelessness & despair. It has been 6 years since my arrest for CP (3 illegal files in a hoard of nearly 1.7TB worth of legal porn). Local news had a field day, making things up (contradicting the police report), which made an already bad situation worse. Forced to resign from my job of over 10 years. Unemployed with a wife and two kids, I was certain we would end up homeless at some point. Facing a felony and up to 3 years in jail, I was drowning in despair. For Christmas that year God sent me an angel (a friend of a friend) that came knocking on my door to ask me how I was doing. Two weeks later I was working for him. The pay was 1/4 what I had been making but it was something. 18 months later I got an interview with a very small company that hired me without even filling out an application even though everybody else that worked there had filled out an application. If you knew the details behind it you would know why I’m convinced it was divine intervention. I was now making enough for us to survive without dipping into savings which was getting low. 3 more years would pass, things getting better each month, and I would be presented with an even better job opportunity. In fact, I’m making more now than I was the day before my arrest 6 years ago. My 17b petition was granted (reducing the felony to a misdemeanor) and I was then able to get removed from ML site. Not saying my life is now perfect but compared to what it was 5 years ago…wow what an improvement. Just saying things can and do get better. Hardest part is believing it so that you don’t give up hope. Don’t let the devil rob you of all hope because you won’t make it. Remember you aren’t alone in this, even though at times you might feel like you are. Are you in the Silicon Valley area by any chance?

    • AnotherAnon

      I hate this pig too much to end it all and give him any satisfaction. So should you.

      https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=260587&page=1

        • kind of living

          Another Anon lol what piece of crap that PJ guy is , the reporter was much nicer than I would have been about 1 min in to that interview , creepy little freak needs a real good foot to the a$$ , I am amazed that someone has not slapped him off the planet

        • AnotherAnon

          We’re on the same page, kind of living. Time to get pissed.

    • Gwen

      At Peace – You may not realize it now…but how you feel and how you worded your feelings on what you have been put through just could make a difference to someone else. I would like to encourage you to not give up then all those cruel idiots out there win. If you need to reach out and feel like there is nobody there for you…here is my email johngwen31@gmail.com. I am not a professional, just a person with a family member that is going through the same hell and will have to continue going through it, it seems for a very long time. Your not alone even if these unjust restrictions make you feel that way.

  9. John

    We are not alone reach out to each other we need human contact , without it we are alone. So be sombody and make friends.

  10. James

    Dear Janice, Chance and Support Crew at ACSOL:

    I cannot thank you enough for your…ever continuing efforts. We would truly be lost without you.

    These setbacks sting, I know this…but doing the right thing as you are, and all the affection and sympathy you get…is not really enough.

    I am sending out another hundred dollars today, (I try to do this four times a year plus a little extra at the meetings). This is not enough, I know, but it is something and maybe covers a little for someone else that would like to contribute but can’t because of imposed financial difficulties.

    Seriously, we all really do actually love you…strange to say, but we do.

    Thank you again for everything.

    Best Wishes, James

  11. Marty

    Setbacks are not permanent. Wars are neither won nor lost by a few victories or setbacks. Have to work hard constantly. Thank you Janice and Chance for your constant hard work and perseverance for all Registrants!

    As wonderful as they are, they cannot fight this war alone. Anyone who can offer themselves as a litigant or volunteer, please do so. If you have Twitter or another social media account that does not suspend Registrants, do your homework and start conversations to get people to think. Even if you have to block a few jerks who will only cause grief, so be it. If one or two people learn, that is a victory.

  12. Karl Hanson's Magic Crystal Ball (insert 50¢)

    In all three cases, five of the seven judges are Republican appointees. The IML challenge and Seventh Circuit Courts that decided against registrants were unanimously Republican appointees. In the Third Circuit case, two of the three judges were Obama appointees.

    Dismissed IML Challenge
    – Judge John Walter: Republican Appointee [W. Bush]
    – SOURCE: http://all4consolaws.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Order-MTD-granted-July-2018.pdf

    Seventh Circuit Decision
    – Judge William Bauer: Republican Appointee [Nixon]
    – Judge Ilana Rovner: Republican Appointee [H.W. Bush]
    – Judge Diane Sykes: Republican Appointee [W. Bush]
    – SOURCE: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca7/17-1061/17-1061-2018-07-11.html

    Third Circuit Decision
    – Judge Joseph Greenaway: Democrat Appointee [Obama]
    – Judge Patty Shwartz: Democrat Appointee [Obama]
    – Judge Jerome B. Simandle: Republican Appointee [H.W. Bush]
    – SOURCE: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca3/16-3440/16-3440-2018-07-05.html

    This is both a Democrat and Republican problem. But it seems that Republicans are the worse of two evils when it comes to RSOs. Should we be concerned with the masses of judges that Trump is appointing into office (not that anyone has any power to do anything anyway)? Trump may be “winning.” But with winners, there are also losers. Who is losing?

    More and more, the Libertarian Party becomes a more attractive alternative. Too bad few Libertarians are electable.

  13. Paul Bechtel

    Are you accepting donations for legal fees to challenge the states in federal court concerning the findings of the 6th Circuit Court of appeals (16-768 Doe v Snyder)and the US Supreme Court’s refusal to review that decision that most all registration requirements are unconstitutional based on the ex post facto, punishment and 5 other provisions of the US Constitution?

    • David

      Paul,
      I believe donations are always very welcome!!
      To contact ACSOL directly, please scroll up to the top of the page, click on “Menu”, then select “Contact”. You will then be able to send ACSOL a message directly. Please DO make a donation! 👍👍👍

  14. David Whitehead

    This is all so incredibly frustrating! 😡
    If you would simply change the words from “sex offender” to “convicted DUI driver”, the public would be up in arms about all the bullsh#t lawmakers keep piling on! Seriously, each of you, consider your own story and replace it with “DUI driver” and you will see how outrageous it sounds. Special license plate identifyimg the driver as convicted of a DUI… “DUI Driver” stamped on your drivers license and, now, on your passport….. no living within a 1,000 feet of a school, church, playground or daycare center…. can’t stay at a campground or step foot on a school campus…. our Mr. DUI had been required to check-in with police for 5 years, then they re-write the rules and DUI driver now has to check-in for the next 20 years…..all the rules change every town, city, county and State you visit… and so on….. and so on. Oh, can’t forget this: a felony charge & prison time for the slightest infraction or error on any of these “purely civil, administrative requirements”!! 😡😡😡

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 *