ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

National

NY:15 sex offenders charged with unregistered email accounts

Fifteen registered sex offenders were arrested this week for allegedly using email accounts on social networking sites like Facebook without first registering those accounts with the state Sex Offender Registry, officials announced Thursday.

Under E-Stop legislation passed in 2008, these Oneida County sex offenders were charged with felonies and issued tickets to appear in Whitestown Town Court following a sweep by the Oneida County Child Advocacy Center, New York State Police, the Oneida County Sheriff’s Office and police departments in Kirkland, Utica and Rome.

While the arrests do not suggest any of these individuals were attempting to contact underage children online, law enforcement officials said during a news conference Thursday that it is important to hold sex offenders responsible when they don’t follow the rules. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. bruce

    this is in New York but I thought it was unconstitutional for them to Make us give web e-mail info? They just busted 14 Men & 1 Woman in new York for this.
    http://www.uticaod.com/article/20131219/NEWS/131219305/10285/NEWS

  2. Tim

    “it is important to hold sex offenders responsible when they don’t follow the rules.” These people were not proven to have harmed anyone online. Yet, bank corporations caused thousands of people to lose their homes. What was the worst they got, a fine that is a small portion of their vast profits, and no admission of wrong doing on their records. People in the furure are going to look back at this time in disbelief, just as we used to look back at the world of Dicken’s Scrooge. “Are there no prisons?…

    Read more: http://www.uticaod.com/article/20131219/NEWS/131219305#ixzz2o4Ws17in

  3. Joe

    Again, thanks to those who challenged California’s Proposition 35… the EFF, ACLU, California RSOL, Janice, etc.

    • Eric Knight

      While our case, it if it successful wouldn’t apply to NY registrant social network violations directly, it can set up a precedent where such laws can be fought outside the 9th circuit jurisdiction. This includes the draconian requirements by other states.

      This “investigation” probably was the result of some deputy’s suggestion to Google the registrants’ names and submitted EID’s to get their “proof.” I hope at least one of the registrants gets a serious lawyer to fight this crap.

  4. mch

    “hold sex offenders responsible when they don’t follow the rules.”
    My question is, who holds the police responsible since that is the single largest profession of sexual molesters, sex offenders and sexual harassers? Who holds the politicians responsible for their greed, corruption, for their insane laws that destroy lives, separate families, for their repeated lies, secret deals, spying on American citizens? Seems that all of America’s problems fall square on the shoulders of RSO’s! Nobody else is held responsible for crap!

  5. Brubaker

    They have a policy that undermines and goes against the Constitution …..a few examples are that their forcing you
    to give up private communication information when every
    other citizen would have had a court ordered search warrant for communication information ….even equal protection applies so c’mon NewYorkers sue BIG ….also
    putting people back into parole conditions are their blatant reckless disregard to human rights and Constitution …HomeRun those dictator / communist laws.

  6. Tim

    “Amendment IV, US Constitution

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
    RE: “shall not, not “may not”. I thank CA RSOL, ACLU, EFF for upholding this against the very loose interpretation applied too often in the name of “public safety”. Under 2% recidivism plus applying this to people like me whose crime didn’t involve the internet is not reasonable, just symbolic. There is nothing about “symbolism” or “sending a message” in the above amendment.

  7. Anonymous Nobody

    I’d sure like to know how they found that these people were on social network sites like Facebook. Were they using their real name and identity and picture?

    If not, I would have to ask how much spying of all kinds of people, not just registrants, was done in order to find them online and identify them — this scares me even more than the NSA spying! It sounds like a dragnet collecting information about everyone on social networks and matching it to other information collected to in the end determine who is who, and thus which ones are registrants. The NSA spying controversy would pale in comparison to this!

    And how could they even get this kind of information from places like Facebook — without already knowing who is who, or already having a violation linked to a specific accountholder (which they said they do not have), they could not get a legal warrant. Why are Facebook and others just handing over clear violations of privacy in an fishing expedition to identify people to afterward then see if they have any violations of being a registrant who has not listed that account?! How many non-registrants have had their information inspected, identified, and personal, private matters gone over with a fine tooth comb by these people?

    And for such an effort, how much time, staff, and equipment – how much cost has this imposed on taxpayers!?

    For no one to ask into this — that is shocking.

  8. Justice for ALL

    @Anonymous Nobody

    It’s because they are “Just Sex Offenders” that no one cares enough to ask. But in all honesty, that is nothing compared to Florida’s expense on so called “Experts” ….. Take a gander at it:

    http://interactive.sun-sentinel.com/jimmy-ryce/witness.html

    That is some serious money spent on just singling out sex offenders. The doctors even say this law does NOTHING but fill the pockets of experts.

    In short, these Sex Offender Laws have different meanings all the while hiding behind “Public Safety” and “For the Children”: MONEY and PUNISHMENT.

    To us, they mean Restriction, Unconstitutional Laws, Stigma, and Fear…..and in some cases, Hopelessness.

  9. FRegistryTerrorists

    Hello everyone. It is great that you are following the news and posting here, but please also post at the source of the article. You can probably even just copy what you post here and post it there.

    It would be great if every time an article is written, 100+ comments appear opposing it. Zealots who support these thieving Registries need to clearly see that we will not accept them.

    Merry Christmas to all good Americans. Miserable Christmas to the un-Americans who support the Registries.

    • Anonymous Nobody

      I agree. I often do that and have done so for years (but not always). The more of us who do so, the more our side of the story gets out, and the more people readers see who think this is wrong, rather than nothing but the hate-mongers posting. People tend to follow the lead of the group, and so if nothing but hate-mongers are posting, people will support these laws. Its kind of the persuasive idea that a million people (hate-mongers) can’t be wrong, so go along with them. But we have to show them a million people who say that is very wrong.

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 will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • 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 or other website issues 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 *

.