ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule

General CommentsGeneral News

General Comments October 2013

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of October 2013. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Although I agree with a lot of the progressive agenda, I won’t support them until they start to recognize the registry as one of the greatest civil rights issue of our time. Look, they have 750,000 potential activists on their side if they look at it that way. I am for equal protection under the law, protecting children and the environment from abuse, obsessive military force. Against collective insanity. For reason.

Progressives don’t see 750,000 potential volunteers. They see 100 potential volunteers–about the number of people who attended the conference. We are not showing up and speaking up because of fear. And it is not unreasonable fear. But we MUST get over it. As more people speak up and nothing bad happens to them, more people will stand up and show up. This is going to take a little time, but once we really start to organize and mobilize, we could see an end to registration.

You’re right. I need to at least attend a meeting and plan to do that.
I wanted to share this for discussion:
OK so is US drawing a red line? Threatening to bomb Bahrain? Make the perpetrators register in a global Meagans Law registry?
Oh, they are hosting our navy’s fifth fleet.

No need to travel half way around the world.

This is interesting (from the Wikipedia entry): “The US Department of Defense defined minors at Guantanamo as those below the age of 16, whereas they are defined as below the age of 18 in international law.”

Of course, when it comes to willing and voluntary sexual conduct, the State of California and US Law define a minor / child as those below the age of 18.

Wrap your head around that one.

If they had 11 year old detainees at Gitmo they would define the age of a minor as those below the age of 11. They change/interpret the law to suit them.

I sincerely hope this decision will keep others from suffering this sick and useless indignity!

Indeed! Please don’t tell me that the “doctor” who administrators this “test” doesn’t get off on it!

Just as much as all the police who pretend to be “underage kids in chat rooms are just get off on it as well…living vicariously. Usually those who are so actively against something are secretly fighting the urges they have themselves!

I can just see it at the station…who wants to go undercover as a 12 year old today and everyone’s hands go up!

Cherry picked quote of the day:
“Raping a baby and having a beer are two different things.”

And thankfully(?) a professional concurred:
Christy Gunderson agreed. A mental health worker for 23 years, she said, “We’re treating sex offenders like they’re human. They’re not human.”

Cambridge residents speak up to keep sex offenders out

The quote of the day is as ugly and ignorant as the mindset of a population that would countenance a civil commitment plan from which there is no escape!

Comments like Ms Gunderson’s illustrate why I have developed a strong distrust for mental health professionals!

Do I hear a banjo playing? Sounds like a city full of inbreed cousins anyway…I don’t see why anyone (sex offender or not) would want to live in such an enlightened and welcoming “community” judging by the random quotes of some of the scholars living there!

Christy Gunderson should get back to her “mental health” work and continue her cutting edge electro-shock treatment and lobotomies.

I hear it, too. Paddle faster!

We ought to avoid the illogical fallacy that one case proves the rule. There are people on the registry that will say and do stupid things. I don’t want to be judged by the words of the few, although to give allowances for free speech in cases where the person is your “average Jane”. That said, we should call for Ms. Gunderson’s license to be pulled. She sounds like those who say terrorist suspects should be tortured because they are inhuman. She is in a position of authority and should be professional and scientific in her speech and work. Isn’t there a board of psychologists to petition?

I guess even mental health “professionals” can have their opinions too, but should have the training and discretion to keep those opinions private. Apparently Ms. Gunderson fits into this category of mental health people who are like the blind man in a dark basement looking for the black cat that was never there! If they don’t know, just make something up seems to be the order of the day. Let’s see, best guess, not otherwise specified, might be, could have, may have, all appear in forensic evaluations. I’ve noticed that there is rarely a concrete diagnosis, but a vague, shotgun approach or throw it out there and see if it sticks, or if the judge buys it. I’ve seen that at least one disorder that’s been used has now been pooh-poohed by the APA, hepephilia/hebephilia is a non-existent disorder that was widely used throughout the 90’s and well into the 2000’s. There will be more to come I’m sure. This “professional” should give up her practice and join the rest of the vigilante’s.

Hebephilia is still in play… As you pointed out,it was rejected for inclusion in the latest issue of the DSM-5 but is still used in evaluations of accused sex offenders.

Well, I think if she had made the comment without referencing her credential, as a plain citizen, then it is stupid, but free speech. To claim that a past offender is inhuman is irresponsible and dangerous, if indeed the paper reported her words correctly. That means the committed can be treated as animals, experimented on without consent. Slaughtered? Sounds like the first two are happening already. I think I should do something, besides just talking about it, at least see if there is anything that can be done legally.

Kathie, as we both know, prosecutors will stop at nothing to get primo convictions, even using rejected diagnoses and bought and paid for rubber stamped evaluations reserved just for accused sex offenders.

I spent just under 10 years wallowing in the muck and filth that is the California prison system. I was on the main line, and I was on the sensitive needs yards (SNY). I experienced, first hand, both denial and blame, on my victims and the system. It took me just over two years to realize what I had done, and how damaging my actions were. I will never know how to measure if what I went through was equal to what I did. But I do know that when I sought help before I was arrested, there really was none to be found. I spoke with with literally hundreds of sex offenders while I was in. Each offender had a different story to tell. But one thing is for certain, each man feared the one thing that is completely necessary for recovery and prevention. They feared telling the truth. Our system is not designed to prevent sex crimes, it seems to thrive on it. This is only my opinion, but I am one of the reasons there is a registry. I am sorry I took trust for granted. And I am sorry every day that I was not one of those who helped, but I am one who worsened this conundrum. Every day I live in banishment on the outskirts of the community here. I am now being evicted from one of the last places that is available to me to reside, not because I couldn’t pay the rent, but because of my status. I believe I will be completing this parole in either 8 months or 2 years, 8 months. But I don’t think I will ever truly be able to wash this experience off. I have learned that the people I hurt are all thriving now. I am grateful for that. I will advocate on the side of prevention when I am done completing this term. I appreciate having this forum to speak freely. thank you for indulging me.

You were vague about details — which is fine. But I wanted to comment about one thing you said, although whether the details you were vague about relate to my comment or not I can’t know. You said:

“But I do know that when I sought help before I was arrested, there really was none to be found. ”

This is so very true, true, true. They actually have laws in California that are designed to prevent many sex offenders from getting the help they need to stop, no matter how much they want or try to get that help — and so, of course, they will continue offending until finally caught. These laws clearly establish that solving the problem and protecting the public from offenses is not important, only beating up on people is. That’s because by blocking the ability to get treatment, they should know that assures more offenses will happen that never needed to happen.

Isn’t the entire point of the criminal justice system supposed to be so that it doesn’t happen again? So, why prevent the means to see that it doesn’t happen again — except that you don’t really care if it happens again, all you care about is beating up on people like a sadist?!

The laws I’m referring to are the ones that so clearly violate therapist-client privacy, privilege. California requires all therapists, at any level, to report to the state every client who so much as mentions possibly ever having committed an even low level sex offense against a minor. Of course, therapy doesn’t work if you don’t reveal all, the whole situation, all the issues. Consider, how is a therapist supposed to guide you into understanding and even abhorring what you mdid if you can’t even reveal that you did something?!

And so, the client who reveals any offense will be immediately reported and then arrested, and the talk with the therapist admitted as a confession, with the therapist testifying on the witness stand if needed. Thus, therapy is not even possible — as you said you could not get. They wills top your therapy on the spot and instead throw you on prison, with little benefit of any therapy there — until after you come up for parole, so they send you to a therapy program designed to make sure you never get out.

“A” tried to get therapy, he wanted to stop but clearly could not do it himself, needed help to get control — he could not get any help. What he did might have been wrong, but it is not his fault that he did not have the wherewithal to stop — but he tried to get help and couldn’t get it.

I don’t know of any non-sexual offenses where you lose your therapist-client privilege. Another “Great Protector” has bitten the dust. Fortunately, the victim in this case did make a report and hopefully this dirty cop will be punished to the full extent of the law, as most RSO’s have been. Cops are dirty and seem to be getting dirtier, or at least their victims are speaking out.

Here is another scary trick or treat from the Orange County D.A.: Give us your DNA and we will drop the charges. Here at

If this is true it is most bizarre, indeed.

How just super would it be if the top Law Enforcement agency in OC would, instead of building some creepy database, utilize their time and resource to, say, charge and prosecute the OC Jail guard who instigated / caused the beating, torture and murder of an inmate in the jail.

Charge and prosecute the remaining 3 officers involved in the Kelly Thomas beating and murder.

Etc etc.

When orange corrupt county doesn’t honor the fundamental. right to fair trial and truth in evidence ……..the
pattern becomes corrupt….deliberate indifference ……..point A was corrupted ….they look the other way….they go along with it….point G is the same carryover from A….corrupt.

Daily proof registry is a whitewash…scam…waste of taxpayers funds …….a man not on listing sexually assaults
teenager arrested, while they waste time and money having
you look at a registry…real new crime of sexual assaults are
happening and you didn’t prevent them…..IF….IF you put every persons name on registry ….how do you scam it over the people…??….”nondisclosure is the danger”…….then those
new crimes in vanuys losangeles and the jurupa valley teacher sex crimes could have been prevented public safety …….the whitewash has taxpayers look at listing twenty….thirty years…no new crime there…..yet all the
while new ‘sex’ crime in cities and in the news around them on weekly basis…..BUT Keep Looking at Registry….
new crime just happened all the while around you who were NOT in listing…that’s the REAL danger.

Another interesting partial story. Canada has it too!

Gov. Jerry Brown today (Saturday) signed a new California law to crackdown on sex offenders. I will now be able to sleep at night:,0,5941592.story

The law will require any sex offender on parole who takes off or disables his GPS monitoring device to serve the full time of 180 days for that offense in county jail. Prior to this law, many in county jails were subject to early release due to overcrowding. Sex offenders who disable their monitors will not be eligible for early release under this law.

I note, this comes in the wake of a story in the Los Angeles Times a few months ago about a lot of the GPS devices ceasing to register with the monitors. There is automatically a presumption that they have been disabled. However, it turned out that most of that was actually a failed GPS monitoring bracelet — the company that provided the majority of them for the state was using a faulty device. The state has stopped using those devices and changed them out for the one the second company that provides them was offering.

Isn’t it so nice that in this story, the Times failed to mention that the “sharp increase in sex offenders reported to be removing their device” turned out to be false, was a failed device. Nothing like honest reporting from the Times, huh? Now, all the people who don’t already now about the issue will think that a LOT of sex offenders really were disabling their devices.

That is, there was very little intentional disabling of the devices — this is yet another law in search of a problem. But screaming about this sure shows how devious and dangerous sex offenders are doesn’t it.

Hello, I live in Corona CA. I was advised by me registration officer at my last registration that I could not move. Corona, CA has enacted a local ordinance prohibiting registered sex offenders from residing with 2000 feet from schools, parks, day care centers, etc. I asked him if this meant that I was banished from Corona? he said yes, if I decide to move. this does not make sense to me. It has been 20+ years since my conviction and I have had my conviction expunged. I am engaged and this is a direct threat to my upcoming marriage. is there anyone out there who can help?

The City of Corona has a provision that allows RSO who lived in a an exclusion zone prior to passage of the ordinance in 2008 to remain there. But if you move, you cannot move into another exclusion zone.

This whole banishment thing is horrible and wrong and we need to work through RSOL to put an end to it. It does nothing for public safety–its just additional punishment.

This residency restriction bit was enacted in state law by the electorate — gee, I forget which of the various initiatives as there have been so many, but a few years ago. As I recall — and you would have to double check as it is possible I’m mixing something up — after it was passed, opponents were fighting whether the new law restricting residency could be applied retroactively, contending that would be ex post facto punishment. Seems to me the Superior Court blocked retroactive enforcement in one way or another (maybe it was a TRO, but no final say on the ex post facto challenge), and then there was an agreement — not a court ruling — by the state that it would not enforce it (they did not say but it appears they feared they would lose and did not want a judgement on the record calling it punishment). In the end, there was no final court action on the question, but the state agreed not to enforce retroactively.

Now, it was never absolutely clear in the news reporting whether no retroactive enforcement applied to the individual or merely to the place the individual already was occupying — that is, if they could move at will as nothing of the residency restriction was being enforced retroactively. Still, seems to me I heard something a couple years later that the state was considering resuming enforcement retroactively — but I never heard whether they actually decided to do so.

That is to say, there are so many details and so many loose ends at every turn, its hard to know. And now you raise locals doing such a restrictions on their own, not subject to any state agreement not to enforce. Aargh!

In the end, no matter the state of the law on that enforcement, if the city is going to enforce it, you would at minimum be enforced upon and have to spend lots of money on a lawyer to fight it, and maybe lose, maybe win.

I will add, the courts make you subject to relying on what these lesser educated police officers say — that is, they are not trained lawyers nor are they licensed to give legal advice, such as interpret a law — or you can land in jail, as if they told you, then you had the knowledge required for the law to be enforced. But it is always possible that that police officer misunderstood the law and told you wrong, that possibly it does not apply to those convicted before it was enacted, that that police officer did not understand the distinction of ex post facto application. But you better get some serious confirmation of that before acting on that idea.

Also, seems to me that in Los Angeles County there is some kind of agreement, maybe a TRO, against enforcing the residency restrictions on anyone, even those convicted after the law was enacted — I forget on what basis, but it might be for lack of sufficient number of places where SORs could live (Again, my memory might be wrong about the reason why — there’s just too many details and loose ends on this SOR stuff).

I note, if this is a problem because when you get married, you would be moving in with your new wife, well, I should alert you: If you are spending any nights there often already, then you already are required to register at her address as well as at your’s. If you were already registering there, then that might mean that when you give up your address, and are at her’s permanently, then you still are grandfathered in under the Corona law.

Which raises another consideration for the lawyers: If he were not allowed to stay at his fiancee’s house any nights because he would not be allowed there under the residency restrictions, would not that also raise the Constitutional issue of freedom to associate?

There are 114 separate city ordinances that have all different definitions of restricted zones, sex offenders, loitering, etc. In other words, it’s all a big mess. These laws have zero to do with public safety, it is only retribution and fear. I would like to see a political solution in which all 114 ordinances are repealed in a deliberative process, but I know that is not practical. It’s going to have to be a lawsuit where some lucky city pays out some seven figure judgment to one of us.

No name, I feel for you. Truly. Thats terrible. I had my charge expunged like over 10 years ago and received summary probation for my plea. Thats crazy. I was totally unaware that Corona had passed this ordinance. I think these ordinances banning people from living in certain areas is getting crazy. I mean, lets face it. (this isn’t a put down) Many people move to Riverside, Corona ect for cheaper housing. So, if you keep pushing these crazy ordinances, where are people going to live? I think everyone needs to get on this site, donate money and we really need to push for this Orange County Ordinance banning people from parks and beaches to be overturned. This will set a series cycling in our favor! I dont see how these ordinances can prevail. Here is the real crazy part. I have Detectives come to my home annually to verify my residence. I asked them questions regarding the laws of OC? They didnt know?

Thanks for encouraging those who read this website to make a donation! Resources are needed to challenge the laws which current restrict where a registered citizen can visit (parks, beaches, libraries, etc.) as well as where a registered citizen can live. It’s time to show up, stand up and speak up!

Take the time to read over….and maybe read over again some of the issues and topics ….quite possibly uas missed….
so there hasn’t gone forward a comment mistake like uas…..
confuse the matters issues is what they want……….look up a
topic issue here CARSOL…chances are it helps.

@uas…..what update today of information you have that is a different ruling ..???….what ruling was given after review ..??

I saw something disturbing when I took off from home and couldn’t figure it out., I saw a beat up blue van with graffiti on it. And when I came back stuck in traffic I had enough time to see it again and process what I just saw… A beat up blue van with red spray paint graffiti on it saying “Child Molester” along the sides of the van and “Sex Offender” on the hood and rear area.. on 7th and Dawson Long Beach, CA.. it brought on a chill down my back.. Not because the person is a sex offender, but the actions of the people to graffiti the guy’s vehicle…

Painting graffiti like “Child Molester” and “Sex Offender” on someone’s vehicle is against the law. If anyone knows this person, please contact CA RSOL so that action can be taken.

Yes, please if someone knows that individual reach out to them… I’m not local to that area of Long Beach, and I’m not sure who that person is.. Its a very noticeable with the red spray paint on blue.. It could be parking in front of that new construction site (use to be Big Lots) and that small mini taco joint…

I sent you a message Janice Bellucci thru the site’s email… I want to do this, there is a high chance I’ll see the van since its a route I usually take to leave Long Beach.. Like slip him a letter or leave it on the windshield or something… just need some sort of template or whatever is the normal letter to be leaving for a person in his situation…

I made contact with him and give him the contact info

Thank you Bluewall. It is encouraging to know we are looking out for each other. This guy may not even be a registrant, but that wouldn’t matter. He is a victim of the insanity that’s going around, just like our families members are subject to this vigilantyism.

I received a letter from my probation department ordering me to remain in my home on Halloween from 5pm until the next morning. I was further instructed that I must place a sign on my door reading “no candy” and to keep my lights off. I am not on parole or on federal probation – does the county probation department have the authority to confine me to my home like this?

From my understanding.. and what I went through.. it’s normal.. when I was on it they left their business card and letter saying special instructions with the same instructions that you received.. They roughly can tell you to do anything, if you fail in following your instructions they violate you.. Lucky enough when I had a job during probation I worked at nights so I wasn’t even at home to answer the door

But he said he is not on probation or parole!

Austin, you did not say what county or city you are in — does that area have a local law with that restriction, and the probation department might simply be the one designated to inform all SORs?

Still, that’s the first I’ve heard of a registrant not on parole or probation being told they must confine themselves to their home — that is putting them in custody, and custody is unquestionably punishment and cannot stand under challenge. Even the most anti-sex-offender judges out there will rule that custody is punishment.

That custody could even be grounds to use habeas corpus to seek to challenge your conviction.

I’m sorry Anonymous Nobody, I said I’m not on Federal probation or parole; I am serving a grant of probation in my county in California. But my understanding has been that in California only those on state parole or federal supervision are obligated to follow such strict rules during Halloween. When I was granted probation there were no terms of probation that specified that I would have to confine myself to my home anytime the probation department decided I should.

I just would like to know if the county probation department has the authority to simply impose house arrest on me at will?

OK, so you are on probation.

Re federal supervision or state parole, there are laws for certain offenses requiring certain things on parolees in California. But more and more of those same things are being imposed even on people who no longer are on probation, much less only on probation. And yes, more and more localities are imposing their own onerous rules and obligations on registrants.

I do not believe there is any state law requiring even registrants on parole to confine themselves inside their home for Halloween. I have heard of such laws only at the local level.

Might I ask, were you informed to stay in your home, or were you informed not to answer the door? I have heard of local laws barring registrants from opening the door on Halloween, but not requiring them to stay inside — that is, not putting them under house arrest for Halloween. I am disturbed by any of it, but I am far more disturbed by any imposition of house arrest! Were they perhaps saying “don’t answer the door, just stay inside,” not meaning that you could not leave your home, just that you could not answer they door to anyone?

What you are describing sounds like a local law, not a state law. It is not part of your state terms of probation — because it is not state law. But if the locals make such a law, they do have to notify you or they would not be able to prosecute you for violating it — that is, they have to be able to show that you knew about it.

And as another poster has requires in the thread, let us — of the Website via the Contact button — -know where this is. Janice has sued over these kind of laws about posting the signs and gotten the laws overturned. It is very short notice now, but maybe not too late to rush to block that law in your area.

I have been explicitly instructed to be in my home by 5pm and that I am not to leave my home until the next morning AS WELL AS to not open the door. I’ve further been instructed to keep the lights off at the front of my house and to post a sign on my front door reading “NO CANDY”.

As far as I know these is no local law requiring registrants to do any such thing and as far as I am concerned this is de facto incarceration.

My question is: do probation departments have the legal authority to place me under what is essentially house arrest whenever they feel like it? Am I obliged to comply with such unreasonable orders?

To answer your question this is happening in Nevada County, CA.

Yes, anyone? Are the probation departments clueless? Over confident? Or, are they trying to help us prove registration laws are being used as punishment and therefore unconstitutional.

Save that letter you received from probation. It is illegal for them to require you to place a sign on your door. Janice has succeeded in filing law suits to prevent that from happening.

Thank you Jim – I don’t know what to do. If I don’t comply I’m afraid they will arrest me and then I’d have blown any chance at ever getting a certificate of rehabilitation.

That’s right. But hey, yes, the sign is bad enough. But the custody issue here is worse!

How can anyone see the sign with the lights off? Not where I live. And couldn’t anyone go online to see what houses to avoid? It’s not like Megan’s Law is a secret. Sounds like an arrest looking for rule to justify it.

Im wondering if we should go ahead and file small claim paper work against

if 50 to 100 of us in the bay area just file an $50.00 paper work toward the CEO of facebook in small claim court it might presure them to remove that policy

thank you

Austin, An evenings compliance is better than a trip to jail. Did probation say how large the “sign” had to be? Could it be a micro-sign? After all, you’re in compliance. I always turn off the lights, lock the door and watch TV with no lights on, even before becoming a member of the club. All of what they do is BS and we know that, but make sure you chose the battles wisely. Keep doing right and file for that COR!

Here is my question? What if he doesn’t own the home? What if he is renting a room? Or, what if he is living in the back house behind the front house? What if his ex wife is allowing him to live in her home and she refuses? Hmm. Or, what do you consider Halloween Decorations? Or, what if he (READ THIS CAREFULLY) is a Diabetic, cant leave his home to buy food to avoid his blood sugar becoming too low and he orders a delivery Pizza? Can he still not open the door? Hmm? What if?

When I was on probation I had prohibition on unsupervised contact with minors. That is what was approved by the judge.Now I assumed that meant I could not answer the door when a child was there. My probation officer was intelligent and reasonable and never made me do something so silly as put up a sign or keep me from going outside. I am wondering if you could petition the judge in your case for unreasonable application of your terms of probation.

Tim, I really have no idea. For myself, I plead to a battery and received summary probation for possibly an incident at a massage parlor. I was only required to stay away from massage parlors? (Please don’t laugh). So, if this Halloween law was enacted in my area, I would be scratching my head? Personally, I think the laws prohibiting individuals from visiting parks or beaches will DEFINITELY BE overturned. I think maybe those individuals currently on probation or parole might still have to avoid these places until their probation has ceased. Furthermore, I have no doubt that this Halloween ban will be outlawed as well. We simply need ONE very good attorney to get this done.

Barstow.. Not a friendly place..period… I was driving thru Barstow, pulled off for gas. Went to the gas station to pay in cash, use the bathroom, and buy a few items. And there was a cop car, a Dodge Charger right behind my car. Thought nothing of it until the cop got out asked me to put my hands on my car, pass my driver license to him.. And He was reading off my name, license plate, and VID number (last 6 of that one). The dispatch over his shoulder radio confirmed, listed off my address, name, and description of my car and my priors.. The officer asked me how long I’m going to be here, told him long enough to pump gas and move on.. He let me go, no warning or anything.. I saw him follow me until I was back up on the freeway… WTF???

That’s nuts! Personally, it sounds like a bored cop seeking a little excitement! Coincidence. I wonder what shows with expunged records?

Not that a registrant doesn’t feel restrictions every day … And none more so than your birthday … Today is another one, for some. At 5:00 pm tonight until 11:59 pm ALL outdoor lights must be off AND the front door must be shut! It feels shitty. Thank goodness our city wasn’t one that had the sign requirement. But yet again …. another CLEAR reminder of your past. Feeling shitty in a neighborhood I’ve been in for 25 years, however, only the last three with my love, a registrant. Happy Halloween!! Written with total sarcasm …. The positive side is we’ve saved at least $50+ and the extra weight with the left over candy, lol!