Sex offender wants parks proximity (National City)

A registered sex offender in San Luis Obispo County is suing cities across the state, claiming he has every right to go near schools and parks — and National City has become his latest target. ____ ____, 61, of Grover Beach, was convicted in 1979 of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14. His attorney, Janice Bellucci, says he has relatives in National City and wants to visit.

She sued the city in federal court last week over its ban on sex offenders being within 300 feet of a school, day care center, arcade, playground, park or amusement center. Full Article

Related posts

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
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. 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.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. 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.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. 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.
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.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

What a stupid article…. “Sex Offender wants parks proximity”? How about “Citizen required to register under Penal Code 290 wants his Civil Rights restored”?

And the poll… “Should sex offenders be allowed within 300 feet of schools, parks and other places children frequent?” It is a amazing how quickly something becomes the norm. And now moving about the country normally – should be “allowed?”. By whom? The Mayor of National City? I think not.

Sheeesh… thank you Frank and Janice!

As far as the poll goes it doesn’t really matter how many people don’t want people around parks, etc, because the state supreme court already ruled these local restrictions are not in line with state law, therefore these local Salem witch hunt ordinances are void. What these cities and townships have been doing is placing themselves above the state supreme court laws already in place. I mean; far be it of me to tell them they can’t do this, that is unless they want to pay Janice’s attorney fees. They’d be foolish to resist.

Why do I get the feeling this city is rooting for full of baloney Tony down in OC? I have to laugh at the choice of words here when the article calls their unconstitutional ordnance “innovative.” Well; I suppose they can call it whatever they want, but just because they call a unconstitutional ordnance “innovative” it’s still unconstitutional and goes against state law. And I seriously doubt anyone on the registry would want to go hang on a chain link fence at some nursery school, or any chain link fence anywhere, for that matter. That comment is as stupid as the one about registrants cruising around looking for victims in a post a month or so ago. The author is obviously just trying to stir the pot with that ludicrous statement.

I am always amazed how people as ignorant as mayor Morrison ever get into public office. Morris and his kind should be shipped off to North Korea for at least five years so they can learn why we have laws that protect these fundamental rights of EVERYONE; not just the ones he and his kind deem worthy. I think it would be funny if Janice mailed him a copy of the latest Casomb paper suggesting the very kinds of reforms his kind probably have an intense ignorance based hate of. And you can be sure, these laws and ordinances are ignorance based. That’s for sure.

Thanks Janice, thanks Frank. I always get a good feeling every time the truth of peoples, towns and cities ignorance comes back to biter them.

(NOTE) We (all registrants and CA-RSOL) should start holding family and friend based picnics at the nicest park in every city and town that is forced to repeal or stay their ordinance’s. We could invite the mayor and police chief, as well as the public so they could see that we aren’t the monsters people like Mr Morrison would have them believe we are. We could also hold a workshop on the constitution and bill of rights; they obviously need it!!! 🙂

The article and the poll are the reason for why Janice and CA RSOL exist: Because the tyranny of the majority must be tempered in a legal manner in court. Frankly, the same 75% or so who voted to restrict registrants from park would also vote to force registrants to wear a chicken on top of their head in public if they could get away with it.

Another ridiculous article in my opinion. Mayor Morrison says that if you are a “Registered Predatory Sex Offender”, you don’t get all your rights. Ok, but neither do ALL the others who are not Predators. Again, all would be put into one category since they can’t distinguish. What if another mayor gets in some sort of trouble, would Mayor Morrison agree that now all mayors will have to step down? Exactly! How can these people be in such high positions when they have no common sense or any sign of intelligence, and who are these people who vote uneducated people into office? Everything always boils down to education.

I have been a subscriber of the San Diego Union for over 40 years. Today, I wrote a great response to their article and it was deleted within minutes. My freedom of speech crushed. How do you try to educate the public with such media resistance? BTW, we are no longer customers after this week. We will stride to find another way, a better way.

This poll is meaningless except to show how misinformed the readership of the Union Tribune is. If I owned this paper, I would fire the staff and hire people who know how to do journalism.

One commenter wrote:

On the one hand, I believe if you commit a crime, you pay your debt to society, and we give you a second chance…on the other hand, sex offenders are often not redeemable, and liberal judges, overcrowded prisons, and early releases mean many do not receive just punishment….

So…I respectively replied that perhaps he meant to say that a few are not redeemable and I would agree with that.

Lo and behold they deleted my comment.
I searched the comment rules and found none that should have caused my reply to be removed or is it just common knowledge not to challenge a Top Commenter ?

I did find a rule that was against one comment which advocated violence against sex offenders written by another Top Commenter: Forget putting perverts next to parks, how about putting sex offenders downwind of a pistol range? but it was not removed.

I can only assume that this is an evil intent to promote hate and violence against registrants no matter what their personal situation may encompass.

And for that I can only say shame on them and their supporters.