Fresno State ASI: Revised sex offender resolution passes

A debate over a revised resolution regarding the disclosure of sex offenders on campus, which has been among the main focuses of Fresno State’s Associated Students, Inc. agenda for most of the semester, came to a near-unanimous conclusion Wednesday.

The resolution, authored by Neil O’Brien, senator for the College of Health and Human Services, calls for students to receive a general notification email from the University Police Department that informs a student if a registered sex offender is enrolled in their class, lives in the same campus housing as them or is involved in a university-sponsored organization or program.

Two more statements—one intended to provide alternatives to the student and another detailing instructions on the process of obtaining the sex offender’s identity and information from campus police—are included in the resolution. ASI passed the resolution with a 13-1 vote. The resolution is a non-binding formal statement of the student government’s position. Full Article

Also: Fresno State passes revised resolution that discloses info about on-campus sex offenders

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

5 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

If and when this does come into effect I see students on the registry dropping out and not pursuing a higher education. Has this O Brian character stated and proven what this is supposed to accomplish? And has this been sold to the school based on accurate facts, or fear and panic?

Wow, this is shocking! What if the professor finds out and fails them? What if? I actually volunteered for prison ministries and some individuals are allowed to be released into a half way house (large dorm/warehouse) where they receive extensive drug treatment/counseling. If successful, they are released after 6 months and not put on parole. After a time, some individuals are allowed to leave during the day and come back at night. Some attend Junior College via grants. Murderer’s, gang members, robbers, drug dealers and the list goes on and on! Some have been released for the first time after doing 10 years or more? What about the sex offender who was just plead to a misdemeanor and didn’t do a day in jail? This is a very disturbing article. I would highly recommend taking legal action on this? What’s next? What about the guy convicted of a DUI?

It is not yet passed. I wonder what the campus police has to say about this. According to the resolution language, they would be required to send an email to only the classmates, dormmates or activity partners of the registrant, PLUS advise all these students of alternatives for all of the above – that is now an unacceptable danger 🙂 That sounds like a lot more work than sending an All-Student message.

Either they will balk at the extra work or use it as grounds for requiring more funds. Whatever the final vote, this action has already served its purpose by getting its author the publicity one can only assume is his true goal.

Interesting also that in the case cited the accused was not only NOT a classmate, dorm resident or activity participant, but not even a student at the University. This is par for the course… why is it people gladly latch on to things based on ‘facts’ that have absolutely nothing to do with the purpose?

I thought 290 bars pushing the info out — except by the police, and then only by the decision of the police chief or sheriff when the registrant is classified as a serious danger. I don’t see how the students or any other body can make a policy REQUIRING the police to push it out about anyone, much less about every registrant. That should be preempted by the state law saying only the police chief can make that decision, not some other body.

Frankly, I’m sure that limitation is one reasons why many police agencies make their house checks — so they can create enough of a scene that the neighbors find out about the registrant even though the police did not technically notify them.