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)

ACSOLAction Items

CA RSOL Meeting November 8 in Sacramento

The monthly California RSOL meetings for November will take place on

November 8 in Sacramento
2993 Fulton Avenue, Suite A
Sacramento, CA   95821

Meetings start at 10 am and are open to registrants, family & friends, professionals and supporters. Members of the media or law enforcement are not invited. We invite you to attend and find out how you can make a difference.

Past Meetings

September 20 – San Diego (more details)

October 11 – Los Angeles (usual location – ACLU building at 1313 W. 8th Street in Los Angeles)

[updated Oct 12]

Join the discussion

  1. Janice Bellucci

    There will be much news to share at the meetings in Los Angeles and Sacramento. For example, we will report on the campaign to eliminate city and county laws that restrict where a registered may be present. As of today, 19 lawsuits have been filed and more are sure to come. We will also discuss a new tiered registry bill under consideration by the CA Sex Offender Management Board. The draft bill, if adopted by the state legislature, would allow some registered citizens to leave the registry after 10 or 20 years.

  2. TheJustInInJustice

    On the surface it seems that a tiered system is a viable solution. 10 years is a long period of time to have the same struggles occur as a registered citizen that currently exist today. Giving judicial discretion must be at the forefront to avoid the continued discrimination that can ruin a person life and drag their family through the torment imposed by a misinformed society. There are such talented and courageous proponents willing to stand up to the injustice, like Janice and Frank Lindsay. It’s a strong and respectful recommendation for serious consideration. Elected officials should give judges and the court system, although not perfect, the ability to eliminate tying their hands with mandatory registration requirements. Slaying the evil registration dragon is challenging for sure. However, imposing a tiered system remains flawed. No matter how prudent and reasonable the approach when proposing legislative changes one must always consider the unintended consequences. There’s no question that 10 years versus life is self evident in choosing the former rather than the latter. I’m encouraging the exploration of not jumping into the pool of what appears to be a more tolerable solution. I stand corrected if the judicial provision is already on the table.

    • Tim

      What does allocating resources towards more dangerous offenders mean? Those left on the registry are going to be visited with more compliance checks? They are going to have their internet use monitored? What’s to stop penal code 288 for example from being included in the third tier of what is an essentially offense based tier system, considered next to rape and murder? Already, the sentences for that offence have risen thanks to Chelsea’s law. In the current proposal, one can go up a tier if deemed high risk based on a static 99 that is 47% accurate, but can’t go down to a lower level, unless you’re a juvenile. At least that is something. Nor obtain a COR. It’s an improvement, yes, but based on risk, no. Based on the same myths about offenders. Yes, with some exceptions.

  3. F. DeLeon

    What time is the CA RSOL meeting in Los Angeles?

  4. Kevin

    Thank you Janice and everyone for all you do for us.

  5. Pam Castro

    The CA Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments in People v. Moseley, to begin December 2nd. This is a groundbreaking case for all those who were not convicted of a crime mandating registration, but were sentenced to the registry anyway. Once arguments begin the court has 90 days to come to a decision. This is also an important case for all registrants, as it is bringing to the forefront many issues faced by registrants. If the court rules in favor of Moseley, it will be ruling that sex registration is PUNISHMENT, and not just an issue of public safety. Check it out, and keep your eyes and ears open for this one! You can find out about it on the CA Supreme Court website.

    • catch 22

      Could you post a link to an appropriate Ca Court website to follow this ruling . I am praying for the correct ruling on this .
      Thank You

  6. MM

    The court is hearing both TAYLOR and MOSELY on December 2nd?

    • Nicholas Maietta

      I was thinking the same thing….

    • Janice Bellucci

      Yes, the CA Supreme Court has scheduled argument in both cases on Dec. 2 starting at 2 p.m. The oral argument is open to the public and will be held in the Ronald Reagan State Office Building, 300 S. Spring Street, 3rd Floor, Los Angeles. California RSOL will conduct a press conference following the oral argument at a location to be determined.

  7. Nicholas Maietta

    It’s confirmed. We’re carpooling with a total of 4 for tomorrow’s meeting.

    • coolrso

      yep we came we saw the room was PACKED we actually had to grab a chair and sit outside of the room and listen through the window. In other words we conquered

      Veni, vidi, vici

  8. Owen Cash

    Hi there, I just wanted to say it was a pleasure to meet Janice today at the Sacramento meeting. I hope to be there at the Capitol as well later this month.

    • Janice Bellucci

      It was a pleasure meeting you as well. We hope to see you at the Capitol later this month.

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 *

.