With Video – An attorney representing five Simi Valley sex offenders who sued the city over limits to their Halloween activities said the lawsuit will be the first of several she expects to file over such restrictions. Lawyer Janice Bellucci heads the 18-month-old advocacy group California Reform Sex Offender Laws. On Friday, she filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming that Simi Valley’s ordinance violates her clients’ First Amendment rights.
The suit seeks a judge’s order prohibiting enforcement of the ordinance in Simi Valley, which has 119 registered sex offenders, according to a city report. Bellucci is representing five unnamed sex offenders, three of their spouses and two minor children, she said. Full Article
Kudos to NBC for a well-balanced story! While I don’t agree with the views of City Councilman Judge, I appreciate the opportunity to speak up for the constitutional rights of registrants and their family members.
This is really a great article. I’ll certainly have to say that including children in this suit, says it all! In summary, laws are a social contract that helps people regulate how they treat others (DUI Laws, Murder and ect). I mean, if laws weren’t in place, people would possibly drive drunk (they still do anyways) and we would have out of work people robbing banks if it wasn’t against the law! Although, when a law impedes on someone’s rights (they aren’t able to participate in Holiday Festivities and MUST POST A SIGN ON THEIR DOOR), its thought provoking.. I truly had to read this law a few times to really realize how nuts it is! Its crazy. This is truly a prime example of people put in positions of authority going too far! Furthermore, how about the children affected by this? As the article has already mentioned, there has never been any cases of any child being molested/ect by a sex offender during Halloween? It sounds to me that ONE Thing is going to happen! We will prevail. Thereafter, the only victims stemming from this will be the innocent taxpayers who voted for narrow minded Council Members who are only doing more harm then good for their citizens. This, my friends, is highly disturbing.
I wish to thank Janice for having the gumption on behalf of registrants everywhere to finally draw the line. This has been a long time coming. I’ve seen many comments focused solely on the “yellow star” passage from the original article. They all say that Jews were innocent and Registrants are all criminals, so there’s no comparison. The problem with their thinking is they’ve forgotten what this lawsuit is about. As the Jews were innocent, There are NO guilty Registrants when it comes to committing offenses on Halloween. It may seem like a good idea as a means to protect children, But it seemed like a good idea to put Japanese-Americans in internment camps during WWII. These politicians need to consider human rights for everyone and future repercussions of their actions when they’re drafting these proposals.
I’ll be watching this lawsuit closely as I live in an unincorporated area of riverside county, Ca. that already has Halloween restrictions. County Supervisors here have also proposed restrictions on all Registrants from attending county sponsored events(i.e. fairs and festivals).
I find it ironic that the Simi Valley city attorney calls the lawsuit against them unwarranted. This ordinance was unwarranted!
another good news…..Thank you!….you dont know how this news made me and my family happy…..God bless you
we are sure that result of the lawsuit will be in our favor….thanks again
Again, another feel good law which has no research to show it is useful. Additionally it lumps all persons on the sex offender registry into one category: pedophiles. A pedophile has a sexual attraction to children. Not all the people on the registry have such an attraction. Some may have had consentual sex with a girlfriend when they were 18 and she was 15 and are now 40 or 50 and married to the girlfriend, who is 37 or 47. Some may have “mooned” or “streaked” in the past. To assume all sex offenders are pedophiles is like assuming all police are being paid off by the “mob”. You may believe that but it has no basis in FACT. It does, however, fool the public into thinking the politician is protecting children.