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 February 2015

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of February 2015. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I’m going to level with you guys; I’m scared. With all of this talk of new legislation and litigation, it’s got me spooked. I know I need to focus on my classes for tomorrow, but there’s a point where being a registrant affects the way I think, as I’m sure it does you. I am constantly looking over my shoulder after this brush with jail and probation. It simultaneously made me very afraid and came to grips fairly quickly about what it means to be a pariah in a modern world. We are hated, universally. No one professes their love for a rapist, pedophile, or the flavor-of-the-day criminal thrown onto this list, but their hatred crosses race, sexuality, creed, and politics. I’ve only been on this list for a relatively short time, in comparison to the more lively members, but it’s so jarring going from building up one’s self through childhood and young adulthood, all to have it crash down in a matter of minutes; say the wrong thing, do the wrong thing, act on the wrong impulse, and your house of cards is blown down.

I’ve been a lurker on this site for a while. I’ve always wanted to come to the meetings, but always found an excuse not to. I check this site regularly and given donations via PayPal, but I don’t post articles or get involved in the online community. I’m fairly certain that a majority of you reading haven’t done the same either, but I consider each and everyone of you my brother or sister. I feel your pain when you post about that something that hurts you and I feel a little victory when someone in the world thinks that society unfairly treats us. Every time I am out on the streets, in the halls of my university’s library, or driving by, if I see a homeless individual, I always wonder if they are a transient fellow. When I go to registration, I think about striking a conversation with someone who I know is a registrant, but I can’t help but feel wrong. The camaraderie I feel between each and everyone of you is fascinating and a tad horrifying; I don’t know you, but I always can empathize with what you are going through.

I’ve almost been homeless twice, and if this residency case goes wrong, I might actually be homeless. I was almost violated during probation because of a clerical error, but I’ve been off probation for a little over a year now. The payments I’ve made towards probation, classes and the money my Dad threw down for a lawyer and money towards canteen feel so unjustified. Regardless of all that, I’m here. I’ve held down jobs, going to university, and I have been in a relationship with a loving woman for 4 years now. I’ve seen your stories, especially those about heartache and not knowing when things are going to get better. I’ve seen the writing on the wall that we do not matter as citizens, much less people. I’ve seen the infighting between us because one person won’t be off the list sooner than this person will.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is breaking my heart.

We are arguing over theories that have not been made law, putting our wants and needs over what the big picture is. And that is, abolishment, of this so-called sex offender registry. Under this current scheme, I won’t be off for twenty years. I will have been on this list for half my life under the current plan. But I sure as hell, won’t forget about you when I’m 41. Hell, I want to push it so I’m off at 30. Will it happen? Probably not, but I need to look at the larger picture. And when I’m off, I’ll remember you, and that you are my comrade under this twisted scheme. We aren’t done until everyone is off this list, regardless of the time they put in.

I’m scared because I don’t want this to fall apart. You guys are honestly the reason why I nod my head to the buses full of prisoners that roll by and why I do what I do now. If I’m homeless, I guess I’ll deal with that when it comes, but I would much rather go kicking and screaming, but that’s not what scares me. I’m truly scared that one day that I will turn on my laptop and this organization will be defunct due to us forgetting what our goal is. Until that time, I will keep supporting you guys, keep donating, and maybe, one day, actually show up to a meeting. However, I will always support you guys and gals out there fighting the fight that you never chose. We are stronger than this, and no politician, or judge, or squirming John Public will stop this machine.

With love and regards,

We have very little in common except being labelled as “sex offenders”. I do not feel any brotherhood with a rapist, or child molester, as I am not either of those. We each have our own story about how we can be have this label put on us…we are individuals after all and some are totally innocent and simply victims of getting caught in a web that it is nearly impossible to get out of.

So while we all have the same goal of ultimately either being off this registry or of at least being treated fairly, the vast majority of the population is not on our side. They do NOT care if we are innocent, reformed, or guilty of the most vile crime…they see us all the same and that is not going to change.

Great to be optimistic but honestly there are some who have done things to get them in this situation that I myself would rather not be associated with.

I am going to take what you saying as an offense. You remind me of an individual when I was treatment. He had the same opinion, that he was not as bad as a child molester or rapist. However, when I seen the treatment provider, about 5 years later, he said that only one that reoffended from our group was this guy.

@Harry – clicked the wrong thumb on your post. Should be one up. Because you are right. We are all in this together. Everyone should get the punishment they deserve for their actions, not for a label.

Not all crimes are equal and yet sex offenders are treated as if they are. This is very point we are trying to fight! Get it?

Oh and yes, I do look down at a child rapist over someone who got caught pissing in a public park – absolutely NOT the same at all!

And you story about the guy who was the only one that you know about who reoffended -who cares – still an individual and irrelevant to the severity of the offense.

The issue is not who is (or was) worse than who. The issues are, 1, were you punished in a humane and just manner that fit your infraction, that is, without using cruel and unusual practices and 2, are you still being punished after you have completed the sentence? Your level of disgust has nothing to do with these.

So if you are personally affected by all of this you are either… a child molester*, a rapist**, a weenie wagger, a sexual batterer, a (child) pimp or a child pornographer. Does that about cover it?

If you look down on people in one or more of these groups and think they deserve this registry, it should come as no shock that society looks down on all of them and thinks they all belong on this registry and everything that comes with it.

With that view, good luck hoping the rest of society will find you worthy of relief. Gonna be a long ride…


* “child molester” includes i.e. this guy who at 19 got a bj from his 17 year old girlfriend, now wife.
a guy making comments to a teenager riding a public bus, making said teenager ‘uncomfortable’

** “rapist” includes i.e. the drunk college student who had sex with an equally drunk coed

Tired of hiding, you seem to have missed the point completely. No one here has even once complained about sentencing for a crime. That’s because that is not the point. The point is that no one should continue to be punished after serving their sentence.

The offenses you point out as being more severe than your offense: Those people all served their sentences. You are saying their punishment should go beyond even the extreme of their sentence. No, that is wrong. That is sick. I don’t think you fully understand what you are saying — because I have seen what you have written before. Our sentencing laws in California are the harshest in the country for most offenses – these people all have already served a very harsh sentence, and to punish beyond that is unconscionable, and if it were not for our corrupted courts, it long ago would have been declared unconstitutional.

The people you refer to do not deserve more than their already too harsh a sentence. And parole is something they had to earn, and the successful completion of it is supposed to be the test of rehabilitation.

If we have people who already have passed the legal test to be free, then why would you argue that they might deserve more punishment because their offense is worse than your’s – again, they already served a much harsher sentence accordingly than you did.

Why should these people be chased down after completing parole when murderers who have been released are not? It has nothing to do with the seriousness of a rapist’s offense or a child molester’s offense.

I understand your comments are out of frustration, but you need to be very careful what you say — or you will inadvertently justify the beast. When you say it is justified for some offenses, that leaves it justified for all offenses the beast wants to apply it to, including to you. You just justified it being done to you — because it is not being done because of the seriousness of any particular offense, and it is not part of sentencing, where it at least could be challenged as cruel and unusual punishment. It is being done for far more diabolical and evil reasons, it is being done for psychotic reasons, mass psychosis.

Further, the bottom line is that whether your offense was indecent exposure, child molestation or rape, we must all stand together as one, or we will all go down together as one. As you said, we are all seen as one. If we don’t all fight in that way, the divisions you feed here will ruin us all. We must stand united, not divided. We must stay focused on the point: punishment beyond the sentencing. We all know registration itself, plus all the collateral disabilities that have been added to it, is unquestionably punishment, despite what the corrupt courts have ruled.

And notice, I said registration itself – yes, simply having to register each year is punishing, humiliating, psychologically damaging. Again, that is the point. It is not only some of the worst additional collateral disabilities that have been added on one after another over the years that should be opposed, but the basic premise of having to register itself is punishing and should be barred. During probation or parole, OK, but not beyond that.

I appreciate your heartfelt words. I also agree with Tired of hiding, as I’m not a child molester or rapist either. I’m also appalled at the volumes of laws, statutes and ordinances aimed at those of us who have been “caught in this web” that is by and large based on misconceptions, ignorance and outright lies. I also find those that play on the fears and miss-conceptions of the main stream public to be people of an truly evil stripe. And for all the rest;

“ignorance is a choice”
Q – registered and oppressed citizen

Like the two of you am not a child molester or rapist mine was a misdemeanor not involving a child over 15 years ago…having said that I am still a registrant and as far as California law is concerned there is no difference from me, you, or them. Part of the whole problem with society is the THEM vs. US mentality. Those that WERE rapist or molesters after completing their parole, therapy and time served should be left alone to live their lives…Why? Because the only constant in life is change…people change. The USA use to be a place of second chances. Bringing that spirit of America back is something worth fighting for. Together we can bring it back if we are united.

I agree totally with AllMyFriends. Seems as if we gain ground then someone comes by with a law/ordinance that kicks us square in the groin. Probation and parole generally are looking for reasons to violate us, it makes their job easier if we’re back in jail, then they don’t have to deal with us. For those who have loving relationships, congratulations, that’s a huge accomplishment and to find a partner that is accepting and realistic is a blessing. I feel as if I’m socially castrated; afraid to be involved with someone because I’d have to be honest about the past conviction. With that in the back of my head, I’ll be single until I die unless I do find that accepting person too. There is that feeling of hopelessness and despair at times, but then I know I’m a good man. I learned early on that good people make bad choices, but that doesn’t make me a bad person.

I’m also single for the same reasons. I meet nice girls and when things get too close to that really personal level I always back out, fade away, or find some reason (real or imagined) to just blow them off. Sad, isn’t it?

If I was single I’d be doing everything I could to get out of this country and start over somewhere else.

Having married and had children before this whole web site BS started I am locked in the USA until my kids grow up, and even then I am going to want to stay here as long as I can to enjoy being with them. But, if I was young enough and single I’d say F this country, which said F U to me, and
join the record number of Yanks giving up their citizenship.

I’ll wager a handful are former RSOs from the USSA.

Doubtless, should the opportunity present itself, and it might just, my family and I will pull up stakes and move abroad.

Problem is finding a country who will let you in without a passport (none) or who will let you immigrate with a criminal record of having a sex offense.

So even giving up that little blue book might not be as easy as you would like to think it is.

I would love to leave this crap-hole certain types of people have turned Amerika into. But that costs $$$$ and many registrants have problems finding gainful employment because of the scarlet letter. The Amerikan Gestapo also makes entering foreign countries extremely hard, if not impossible.

They love to hate and are infecting the rest of the world with their “hate” sickness.

With the defacto implementation of International Megan’s Law, it’s not evenl likely that countries will take in any more registrants in any case. Just read the hundreds of posts from the multitudes of International Travel threads.

I also have no desire to startup a relationship with a woman just due to the stress of having to disclose my status as a RC. It sure is not something you would disclose on a first date. But at what point do you disclose this fact to someone? I lived with an inner hell full of anxiety for four years while I was living with someone in the best relationship ever in my life that I had not disclosed to. But after the law changed and I was added to the public registry, I had to disclose my status right away before someone else told her. She took it better than expected and was supportive. But within a year the judgement and influance from her family caused her to leave me. So now I have given up completely on looking for a relationship for as long as I am on the registry. The stress of disclosing my registry status to a potential love intrest is just to great for me to handle. I still have woman (not knowing my status) that show an intrest in me but I ignor those situations at all cost. It is very depressing to have to be immune to any desire of a loving relationship. So much for being able to reintergrate back into society.

Ron; I fully understand where your coming from. I disclosed my status to a girl when things started getting serious. Then one night she had a bit too much to drink and outed me to all of my neighbors; never again!!! I kicked her to the curb in very short order.

A great many RSOs are easy to love and worthy of respect but it takes getting to know them fully. If you feel you are one of those than allow women to get to know the real you and finally give her the choice.
If she rejects you than please realize that it is saying something about her and not you. Until than, relish your time together.

I think at first people can be acceptive to dating a Registered Citizen until they find out there is a stigma attached. People do treat our loved ones as being foolish or stupid for dating such a dangerous person. They are often asked why they would have a relationship with someone whom society deems dangerous and mentally sick. Their family and friends don’t understand why they would choose to be with us. Not many people can stand up to this type of critisism. It’s so much easier to break up with us to get away from this awful stigma.

It’s hard for us to handle this stigma, so I can understand why someone we want a relationship with to not want to volunteeraly suffer from the public shaming.

I can’t stress enough how the registry IS punitive and the sad part is that it not only affects the “offender” but also the families of the registrants. It actually affects many more family members since families consist of usually 4 or more persons in the household, including CHILDREN, besides the registrant. We are being mistreated, harassed, etc, and our address is listed on the website. So, why in the world can we, as the family members not file a lawsuit. I included a paragraph of what a “mass” action suit is. We may not be able to file a “class” action suit, but what about this?

“Mass torts are often used when one of the legal criteria for proceeding as a class action is not met. For example, often a mass tort action is used when each plaintiff in the group has so many individual and uncommon factual circumstances that they outweigh the common issues of fact and questions of law necessary for proceeding as a class action”.

Thoughts? Anyone with a legal background who could chime in to see if this is something we could address?

I don’t care who’s a child molester or rapist we’re all in this fight together, we have all paid our debt to society when we were in prison or jail so we need to get on with our lives now this registry is stopping us from doing that that’s why we need to stick together with Janice and her team and get rid of all these unfair laws

This is NOT a protect the children issue, but it is being used to appear as such. There has not been any history of a registrant (after going through probation, therapy and time served) attacking a child in a park. The real motive I believe is a political one. Registered citizens have become the perfect new political whipping boy for votes. Face it under the guise of punishing those deemed as evil and from the angle used to protect the children who wouldn’t be okay with these kind of measures? To NOT be for them you would somehow be seen as NOT being there for child safety.

What fuels their reasoning is the societal climate. People are afraid and out of control. It is from that Black-hole of darkness that comes our challenge. It’s not these people we must fight it’s their fears. Parents lack of control of their kids, the feelings of insecurity about the future and the feeding of that fear by the media. Society has a cancer it’s the THEM verses US mentality and the illusion that we are somehow separate from THEM. We are them. We registrants come from the same backyards and playgrounds as them. Defining that is our challenge.

Registrants are the best targets to release against from that place of darkness. How do we fight such a Goliath? We do it with truth. This truth and the history that has always looked for a scape goat to victimize. The truth from the past of those once viewed in this way (slaves, Jews, Japanese Americans and the Native Americans) are our allies. We will gain more allies to fight this evil as the truth reveals itself to others and to society over time…some in the clergy and some in societal groups, but most important WE needed to hold fast and stand firm with each other.

This fight is a light against darkness fight people. The sad thing is that this darkness is thought by these (otherwise nice) people as a thing of light. The Sex Offender Registry is a LIVING DEATH it is Evil and it is Wrong. Proverbs 16:25. There is a way to a man that seems right but the end thereof is the ways of DEATH. Be of good cheer people we are on the right side of this issue. TRUTH

Guerrilla warfare is where the entire army is not engaged. It is focus on one soldier a time. However, with persistence it will defeat the entire army. We need to engage one soldier at a time with the truth, until the army is defeated.

An idea: Could CA RSOL – with proper funding – produce a flyer or brochure that would be intended for the general public, in order to provide facts about RSO, recidivism research/rates, tiered registries, community safety, etc.? It could include URL addresses for additional information.
This may help the general public to get a better grasp of the issues and alleviate some of the fear and hysteria.
And it could be included in RSO’s letters to their(our) elected representatives.

Oh..ok David mean somehow getting information to the public what the Constitution is and how important it is to support and protect it…on how supporting and Defending. It will help them and our country……that putting free men to double jeopardy and violating peoples civil rights goes against this nations foundations of human rights ..treating free men like you would want to be treated.

I am afraid that anyone old enough to remember the days when freedom mattered is near dead now. The new post 9-11 generation is too controlled by the government to even know what they are missing and what used to be.

The new department of this and the department of that…1984 arrived late but it certainly is finally here in the USA!

Welcome to the new America!

I agree, this generation accepts any label thrown out there by the media and government. I can’t for the life of me see how people can group a whole population under one label, when the crimes that put you under that label vary so much within a state and between the states. I can’t believe that such a system of lumping people together for wholesale restrictions and punishment is still legal. One has to trash the Constitution before that can happen. You have to go back to before the US constitution was penned to find something similar. In eighteenth century England, theft was their “sex offense”. You could be put to death or banished to the wildernesses of the colonies weather you stole a chicken or engaged in armed robbery. The American experiment and the prison reforms of the 1800’s were supposed to change all that, and bring criminal justice out of the dark ages into the age of reason. Apparently, this generation forgets what it was like to live under the supreme authority of the state without any inalienable rights. Those of the wrong color, the wrong gender, the wrong sexual preferences still experience tyranny of the majority, even though they have laws on the books that say they have rights. If you are convicted of the “wrong” crime, forget it, the Constitution doesn’t apply to these people who make and interpret the law. How is this so? They’re sworn to uphold the Constitution against all enemies, which now includes them. It’s just wrong.

It actually is the post-Berlin Wall era. When the Soviet Union came apart, the Cold War ended, and suddenly the “godless Communists” were no longer available as the diversion, as the skapegoat for everything — as the topic to prevent other topics from having to be faced. A new diversion was needed. I knew it would be crime, but I had no expectation that sex offenders would be singled out for all of it.

That is why this is going on, because they need a skapegoat – and we are far too easy a class for be it. Gee, we have politicians who have built their entire careers on constantly coning back with more and more to add on to get the sex offenders, my favorite example being Adam Schiff. Sex sells.

And since Ronald Reagan, this new generation you speak of very different attitude taught to them their entire lives – it is all they know.

Clark, if I thought the Constitution arguments would do any good, Yes, I would recommend them. But I think we’d have more luck the facts: non-threats vs. genuine threats; recidivism rates; grossly overpopulated therefore useless registries, etc.
Maybe on the cover flap is a picture of a shifty looking man in an overcoat with a caption reading “The Myth”. Then in the inside flap, a picture of a whitebread, Joe average family -dad, mom, and kids- with the caption reading, “The reality”.
Just ideas.

I thought I’d share the punitive nature of being a registrant.

Today, I was turned away for medical treatment at a county medical center because of my status. They asked, and I was honest. Although I told them I am not subject to Megan’s Law and therefore no one would know I’m a registrant unless I told them. Apparently there is a school (which I didn’t see) connected to the facility and by law, no 290 registrant can be treated at their facility. Did I mention, it’s a county-run facility? So instead of receiving treatment from a doctor just 2 miles from my home, I now have to go 12 miles to their southern medical center of which is all freeway miles and heavy traffic.

This is the first time I’ve ever been rejected due to 290 status. First time for everything, I guess.

More info please. What State? County? What type of school (K-12, Trade School, Collage)?

San Mateo County Health System in CA. I was referred to this clinic by the county hospital specifically because it was close to my residence.

I’m actually quite surprised considering it’s a liberal county. The intake worker himself stated that he is against the registry, but the law states that the facility cannot work with RSOs.

The school is private, secondary education (6-12). There was never any indication there’s a school next door. It looks like a regular office building. No signs either.

This is outrages like I said we are all being denied access to all these public places that we as tax payers have paid for. There has to be some way to sue for monetary damages

That Carson city councilman, Robles, was on KFI-640 John and Ken Show, on Friday the 13th, spouting his drivel. I know Janice was on there once before, maybe she can get on again to counter him.

Maybe even offer to debate Robles on the John and Ken Show over the facts of this issue (like the was no problem with RSOs snatching kids out of or molesting them in the city playgrounds or libraries that this ordinance was/is needed).

See if he has the guts to do that.

Here is a hypothetical question for anyone with legal chops:

If I were tried and convicted of having sex with an underage girl who subsequently was charged as an adult for a different crime could I then go back to court and have my conviction reversed?

No you can’t. She may killed someone at 15 at was tried as an adult but if you have sex with her at 15 you still broke the law and the two cases are not related.

Sorry – no get out of jail free card for this.

Interesting read. Registered citizens are NOT the danger to society. People like this guy are, using their position to intimidate and blatantly break the law. Our daughters stand a greater chance of being raped or molested during a traffic stop than walking in the park, going to school, church or McDonalds…all those places they’re trying to prohibit us from going.

Anonymous Nobody said “It actually is the post-Berlin Wall era. When the Soviet Union came apart, the Cold War ended, and suddenly the “godless”

I see the roots of this going back even further to Nixon. Nationally, Nixon got tough on crime as a reaction to the urban riots in many places in the US after MJK Jr’s killing. Places like Miami, Newark, NY, Memphis, D.C had riots. Reagan ended the cold war which led to the falling of the Soviet Union. But it did not fall until Bush Sr. was president. In California, the tough on crime crap started about that time, 1990.
1990 is when the 3 strikes law came about in California, around the time of the 1990 Gubernatorial election between Dianne Feinstein and Pete Wilson. These 2 are some serious tough on crime fearmongers who built their careers on tough on crime scapegoating.

“we are far too easy a class for be it. Gee, we have politicians who have built their entire careers on constantly coning back with more and more to add on to get the sex offenders, my favorite example being Adam Schiff. Sex sells.”

I find it interesting some here have called Adam Schiff, Antonio Villaraigosa and Kamala Harris tough on crime. I would call Adam Schiff average on tough on crime. Harris I have not seen using ‘tough on crime’ hype to scapegoat people, same with Villaraigosa I have not seen him doing that either. Villaraigosa brought in Bratton who was smart on crime more than tough on crime. I think its more of a runoff between Villaraigosa and Schiff to see who will go against Harris, since Schiff and Villaraigosa both have their base of support in Socal, whereas Harris’ base is in Norcal. It seems to me that Schiff would be running for AG to replace Harris instead of against her for Senate since the AG position seems to hold more power. But I am not scoffing at the position of US Senator. It would be a promotion for Schiff to go to the Upper house, the Senate from the House of Reps, seeing as how in 2016 its more likely for the Dems to take back the Senate. But still being in the senate is being 1 of 100, so I still wonder why Schiff would not choose to run for Cali AG instead. Schiff probably knows the House of Reps will stay in Republican hands and he’s not gonna lose being a committee chairman of whatever committee he is on in the House since the House is controlled by the Republicans and this probably won’t change. Schiff wants to move up whatever the case if he runs for Senate or runs later for AG, since the person in AG position frequently rises to higher offices.

I appreciate your comments. Allow time to explain some.

Schiff, whose background is as a prosecutor, rode the sex offender scare into office, and during his entire time in the Legislature, was always in the forefront of adding yet more draconian crap onto former sex offenders. And he was always speaking about it — hyping it to the hilt – when speaking in his district. Whatever his attitude about crime overall, he is a major figure against sex offenders. (I don’t know who it is in Congress who is behind the crap that has been coming up on the federal side,but I’m sure Schiff is very supportive of it as he always has been — and I find it surprising that the federal push got going around the time he was elected to Congress.)And sorry, but Schiff has zero chance in a Senate campaign — he is not a well known figure! Schiff is not at all on the level that Villaraigosa is. Schiff does not have a political machine, like Villaraigosa does. Yes, Schiff might run for state AG – but even that is no clinch for him, as he is not known around the state, not even very well know around his own county. Schiff has his district pretty locked up, but zero beyond that. If he does run for AG, you can expect him to be talking about more stuff to impose on former sex offenders — he has never stopped calling for more.

I already told of Villaraigosa’s interest in having a local TV show to feature all the individuals on the registry! Before that, he was the Assembly leader who presided over the big expansion and reach of registration in the 1990s, something he could have used his position to block. He was very willing to shepard it through. Overall on crime, Villaraigosa might have different attitudes for other offenses, but he is ready to exploit sex offenders to the max.

As for Harris, the comments arose because of her action on the Ninth Circuit ruling. Her staff assured she will be pushing hard in the Legislature to override that legal argument with a new law, thus taking strong action to make sure there is no relief for former sex offenders. And this comes after how many years in office and doing nothing all that time to even so much as slow the ever expanding number of legal disabilities imposed on former sex offenders. All she has done her entire time as attorney general is send her lawyers out to fight hard to defend what she should be attacking as unconstitutional. She is supposed to be one of the checks and balances against legislative overreach, but instead she is defending it tooth and nail. And now she is not even wanting to wait for the courts, instead wants to fast-track that Ninth Circuit decision into oblivion – so that’s done during her campaigning for Senate, so she can exploit sex offenders. Very bad sign from her — again, no matter her attitude about other types of offenses.

Regarding your comments about the history, yes, that is so. But that earlier history also is why I did not expect sex offenders to be so singled out, because prior to the Wall coming down, the tough on crime thing was more about violent offenders generally, not at all about sex offenders specifically. It was an also-ran in the world of distractions. But when the wall came down, in a time when for decades Communism was the top distraction, a new top distraction was needed, and crime was a bit blunt. They hit on sex offenders, and being as sex sells, it became the top distraction of them all. That was already building quietly and in the background when the 1990s arrived, but it was Bill Clinton and his attorney general, Janet Reno, who made it the number one top issue and distraction of them all, bringing about the federal rules for registration and making the registry public.

I would like to see Janice of state Attorney General. 🙂

Does anyone know anything about Vermont? Just glancing at the RSO laws, it looks like it might be one of the best states (no residency restrictions, 10 year registration for all but 4 people in the state who have life, etc). Just looking for some feedback. Thanks

NotLikingCal – Be careful on any state move. Almost all states have an exemption that if you move there, the duration on the registry from your state of conviction takes precedent. So Californians moving to Vermont will be Life Time registrants, just like home.

Besides you then fall under AWA/Sorna for any ‘interstate’ moves.

“So Californians moving to Vermont will be Life Time registrants, just like home.”

I’ve read Vermont’s laws and I don’t see this. Only 4 people in the whole state have lifetime registration.

NotLikingCal- Sorry, I meant to say “could” not “will.” You may be right, I could not find a specific reference. However, a quick review of the Vermont SOR laws here:

Perhaps shows under Section 4.1(7) where it states “[applies] … prior to taking up residence within this state was required to register as a sex offender in any jurisdiction of the United States”

Since you are “always” required to register in California, they “may” apply it the same here. States have been very careful to eliminate any “form shopping” of reg laws to keep registrants from moving there en mass. But Vermont may be an exception.

Contacting an attorney in Vermont with this background may be the best next step. Good luck in your search.

I cannot find the cite but it is also my understanding that, when moving to a new state, the registration period from either the old state OR the registration period from the new state for a similar offense – WHICHEVER ONE IS GREATER – will apply.

Meaning, coming from California, one would always be a lifer regardless of the new state’s laws.

Think about it, it kind of makes sense. Otherwise registrants would flock to the state that would allow them to get off the registry – either in the shortest time, or get off at some point, period. Like you are contemplating. Our thoughtful legislators call that “state shopping”. And who wants that?

Furthermore, in some states, i.e. Ohio, one can be re-classified as a Sexual Predator for the only reason that one is / was a lifetime registrant (even if the old state has lifetime registration only, even for misdemeanors (CA, FL, AL and SC do).

Plus changing states makes you subject to the Adam Walsh Act and SORNA, even if the new state is not AWA compliant, and that is whole other can of worms. Anyone, even a lawyer, who claims that they understand that hot mess is full of sh*t, in my opinion.

Your only choice, really – other factors notwithstanding, is to stay here and help get CA law changed. Click that PayPal button and attend a meeting or the protest in the City of Carson on March 7. Show up, stand up and speak up.

“I cannot find the cite but it is also my understanding that, when moving to a new state, the registration period from either the old state OR the registration period from the new state for a similar offense – WHICHEVER ONE IS GREATER – will apply.”

There is no Federal law that says that. Moving is correct that many states have that written into their laws, but I do not see that in VT’s laws.

I like Vermont, particularly one of its Senators. I caution, though on having a mass influx of people going as refugees from states that have more draconian laws, especially for a refugee population that has limited economic means and might end up being wards of the state. Look at what is happening in Europe with it trying to deal with an influx of people from the Middle East and Africa. Tolerance often goes out the window when the society becomes stressed. I agree with the previous post, we need to work to change the situation here first, because running may not be the solution after all.

“If not us, then who?
If not now, then when?”

― John E. Lewis
I would add, if not here, then where?

Generally for years, Vermont and Oregon have been the “easiest” states to live in. Unfortunately, as more people “publicize” this fact, I fear that those states too, will fall into the AWA attitude of the federal government. Vermont is a beautiful state, mostly small towns. I lived there for a while, but California weather and job opportunites, called me back. Good luck to you, whatever you decide.

I know this isn’t a job posting site (or looking for a job site) … But, since I know of the site and have since it was formed … I’m going to go out on a limb. We live in North Orange County, CA and today my husband, an RSO was released from his job after almost four years. It is a private company and they didn’t do a background check when he was hired. On Friday they called him to the office after his shift and said he needed to meet with the owner on Monday morning, which he did. He said he felt something “odd” on Friday afternoon and then this morning they let him go. Of course, we have no recourse since CA is an at will state … So, the reason for my post is to see if there is anyone in the same area that knows of anyone looking to hire someone with strength, honesty and the ability to do whatever is asked of him. His conviction is from 1987, at the age of 19 and nothing since. He was 19, she was 21.

Any input or resources someone can give would be much appreciated … As we all know the battle that is now ahead of us. If you have info and would like to contact us please leave your contact information with the group administrator privately. Thank you …….

BTW,,When I registered today,,I Handed them the Affidavits with an explanation they Might want the “DOJ ,IA” look into Butte County Judicial system and Told them There IS Several Witts. and Real Factual Evidence Ready For Court. They took and Made Copies they Were All Treating Me Very Nice today as I was Leaving,,Hmmm I wonder Why? and the Lady Is Always Nice to Me but today she had a lil Smile on Her face…..I did ask Her If She Knew what I just did,, And She Just Smiled and it’s a fuse lit at Both Ends….Yep And I’m The Monkey in The Middle on the Keg! Northern CA. Butte County,,,IS gonna Have to Address This..IT is NOT goin’ Away! IF there IS ANY true Justice Left in this System This Will be Remedied for the Sham it Was in the Beginning. Now How Many Others Are there is MY BIG question??? Because IF they Did this to Me, God Only Knows How many Other Families and Children were affected and Innocent People Were Scared into This Or Were Railroaded Like Me. I never Plead Guilty Nor Will I for False Charges!!! !!

Look Up “Corum Novis” Error of Court…This May Help 1 or More of You to look into. It IS the ONLY WAY IF You Were Scammed and CAN NOW PROVE IT..To be Expunged and the Possibility of all rights restored and No MORE WEB>REG.>NADDA! In Fact It IS STILL the ONLY remedy that can Do so POST MORTEM! Interesting maybe it’s a waiting game I think it was isn’t any More.. Now It’s On! Final Round,, Pray Fer the Underdog Guys!

You guys and gals on the registry are going thru a lot of things out there in your area but there is one thing to do. You can stop worrying. Get into the Bible, stand up for your rights. Quit being a _ussy about it. Don’t be afraid to stand up. Lets face facts. so your a sex offender, its just a name they label you. Some of you might or might not have had a victim. I’m just trying to get in church. Do you think I like to have a chaperone follow me making sure I don’t lay my hands on a child or shake his or her hand. Do you think I want to take a lie detector test or let them know my thoughts. See we don’t battle against flesh and blood but principles and principalities and things of this darkness. Rebuke the devil and he will flee. Government can’t stand God’s word so stand up for your rights and remember study to show thyself approved.

What a load of sh^t – get into the bible. What do you think go most into this place in the first place – YES – conservative religious nuts paranoid about sex – that’s what!

Fighting this from a simple human rights perspective is the what to do! Common sense and it has nothing to do with anyone’s god. The constitution is not the bible because it is a real legal document and not a fantasy.

We need good lawyers who are willing to fight for our human and constitutional rights – period!

Sorry for the length of this post. I will not make this common practice.

Anonymous Nobody said “Schiff, whose background is as a prosecutor, rode the sex offender scare into office, and during his entire time in the Legislature, was always in the forefront of adding yet more draconian crap onto former sex offenders. And he was always speaking about it — hyping it to the hilt – when speaking in his district. Whatever his attitude about crime overall, he is a major figure against sex offenders. (I don’t know who it is in Congress who is behind the crap that has been coming up on the federal side,but I’m sure Schiff is very supportive of it as he always has been — and I find it surprising that the federal push got going around the time he was elected to Congress.)And sorry, but Schiff has zero chance in a Senate campaign — he is not a well known figure! Schiff is not at all on the level that Villaraigosa is. Schiff does not have a political machine, like Villaraigosa does. Yes, Schiff might run for state AG – but even that is no clinch for him, as he is not known around the state, not even very well know around his own county. Schiff has his district pretty locked up, but zero beyond that. If he does run for AG, you can expect…”

Maybe I was a bit naive about how much damage Adam Schiff has done with his sex offender add-ons. He seems ok with collective punishment based on single rarely occurring incidents. Not to be an apologist for him, but he did defeat another tough on crime guy Jim Rogan -R, to get elected in the first place. The reason Rogan got defeated was because he supported the Clinton Inpeachment and played a role in it. So Schiff took a longtime Republican district into Democrat hands, by basically opposing the treatment Clinton got for sex accusations against him. Then when he gets into office, he singles out sex offenders. Ok, Anonymous Nobody I am with you so far.

But I would have to disagree on Schiffs popularity. He is known outside of his district. Schiff is in the House of Representatives after all. He supported SOPA,PIPA, and supports TPP. He’s been tough on crime, tough on drugs, voted against the Paul Booker Act to allow states to set their own Medical Marijuana policies. Schiffs district used to be centered in Glendale, but now its centered in Hollywood Hills. So he is known in all these parts . Schiffs district covers the most influential parts of Los Angeles… Hancock Park, Los Feliz, Hollywood, West Hollywood, Burbank, Glendale, Tujunga ( Burbank Adjacent ), Montrose, Silverlake, etc. I would bet Schiff is even well known in places like Lancaster since a lot of people from San Fernando Valley came from the Antelope Valley, with Schiff’s district partially in the San Fernando Valley.

The L.A Democratic Party used to be dominated by Waxman and Berman. Now its dominated by Brad Sherman and Mike Gatto. Schiffs district overlaps with Gatto’s district and Schiffs district is next to Shermans district. But the question of how big Schiffs political machine is depends on how close Schiff is to Sherman and Gatto, how much they will help him, to know if Schiff has a machine behind him. In any case, Schiff surely is at a disadvantage against Kamala Harris in the Senate race, of which Schiff has indicated his intention to run. Villaraigosa is still mulling over the prospect of running. I prefer Villaraigosa to Schiff on tough on crime/sex offenders issues. I was not aware until you told me that Villaraigosa wanted to put sex offenders on a tv channel. You said he wanted that when he first started as Mayor of L.A. But absent that, Antonio Villaraigosa went his entire 8 years as Los Angeles Mayor without scapegoating sex offenders. 8 years without personally being responsible for any Nannystate or tough on crime crap. Anonymous Nobody, you would seriously prefer Adam Schiffs constant piling on to 8 years of no Nannystate crap, no tough on crime crap, no draconian ex post facto nonsense? Yes, I know Villaraigosa as Cali Assembly Speaker probably could have thrown some obstacles to all the tough on crime crap, but I don’t know if he could have stopped them altogether even if he possibly wanted to.

“As for Harris, the comments arose because of her action on the Ninth Circuit ruling. Her staff assured she will be pushing hard in the Legislature to override that legal argument with a new law, thus taking strong action to make sure there is no relief for former sex offenders. And this comes after how many years in office and doing nothing all that time to even so much as slow the ever expanding number of legal disabilities imposed on former sex offenders. All she has done her entire time as attorney general is send her lawyers out to fight hard to defend what she should be attacking as unconstitutional. She is supposed to be one of the checks and balances against legislative overreach, but instead she is defending it tooth and nail. And now she is not even wanting to wait for the courts, instead wants to fast-track that Ninth Circuit decision into oblivion – so that’s done during her campaigning for Senate, so she can exploit sex offenders. Very bad sign from her — again, no matter her attitude about…”

First of all, Harris is not part of the California legislature. She is Cali Atty General. She will most likely be part of the Federal Legislature, as in US Senate, but for now shes not part of the legislature. As Attorney General, she made a good decision to not pursue the challenge to prop 35 in the courts. Do you think Chris Kelly, if he was Cali Atty Gen would have done the same thing? The legislature does not want the draconian cyber-fascist crap Kelly and his Facebook pals have hatched thus far. Harris has not used tough on sex offenders as a scapegoating mantra to get elected thus far. And look who she ran against, Chris Kelly, who centered his campaign on that crap. And she didn’t get into a tough on crime/sex offenders propaganda contest. She won with integrity.

“Regarding your comments about the history, yes, that is so. But that earlier history also is why I did not expect sex offenders to be so singled out, because prior to the Wall coming down, the tough on crime thing was more about violent offenders generally, not at all about sex offenders specifically. It was an also-ran in the world of distractions. But when the wall came down, in a time when for decades Communism was the top distraction, a new top distraction was needed, and crime was a bit blunt. They hit on sex offenders, and being as sex sells, it became the top distraction of them all. That was already building quietly and in the background when the 1990s arrived, but it was Bill Clinton and his attorney general, Janet Reno, who made it the number one top issue and distraction of them all, bringing about the federal rules for registration and making the registry public.”

Tough on crime started out as a distinctly Republican thing with Nixon and Nelson Rockafeller. Rockafeller was much more into it than Goldwater, who was mentioned earlier. Goldwater talked a lot about tough on crime, but his main focus was economic stuff and foreign policy. Domestic law enforcement was not one of his big interests, unlike Nixon who had not much interest in economic issues, but was into crime issues. In California, home of the nations first sex registry ( as you have pointed out ), the california prison guards unions made all this tough on crime, which includes tough on sex offenders, a major priority. They even made their own lobby group crime victims united to push for harsh sex offender laws , more crimes with jail time, longer prison terms, etc. for violent crimes and sex offenses. It wasn’t until the late 70’s though in California that there was ever talk of using the Sex offender registry for anyone other than gays and lesbians. So like you said, the foundations were already quietly building ( some not so quiet ) in the backround for Clinton to come on the scene in 1996.

It’s not so much that the US needed a new bogeyman and sex sells than it is that sex sells and now the sellers are in the U.S. Rupert Murdoch always used sex to sell and make his media empire profit.The onloy difference is Murdoch would now bring this crap to the U.S. Murdoch did it for decades before he bought Fox News, which flourished in the 90’s after Murdoch bought it in 1988. Murdoch owned the Star, a sleazy gossip tabloid, since the 70’s. But it wasn’t until he bought the New York Post in the 70’s and radically changed its political orientation and it became a tough on crime newspaper that the ball was set rolling. This culminated in Murdoch and Ailes turning Fox news in the 90’s into a tough on crime, tough on sex offenders empire. Clinton in 1996 created the Federal Sex offender registry to prove he wasn’t subject to pressure from the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. Clinton also as President signed the 1996 Federal Telecommications Act, although it would have passed with a veto-proof majority even if he didn’t sign it. This paved the way for Clear Channel ( now calling themselves I Heart Media or I heart radio , who are responsible for putting registrants on billboards in Indiana, but thats a different topic ) to own and control most all of the talk radio programming. The Telecommunications Act removed the limits of ownership on radio stations. Prior to this act, the same company could own like 5 stations. With the act, the same company could own like 20 stations and Clear Channel/I Heart Media/I Heart Radio had every subsidary counted as a different company. Clear Channel and Fox News worked in unison as a single propagandas machine on tough on crime ( which includes tough on sex offenders ) with a special focus on selling sex, selling advertisement during programming with sexual content, whether its recounting details of sex crimes or promoting draconian legislation and describing the details of the rare occurring crime that led to the push for the harsh collective punishment legislation. You are correct. Sex sells. Not only Clear Channel and Fox built and rode this bandwagon. It was also other media companies like Viacom, which owns tv stations, has some connection to Paramount, and was originally I think spun off of CBS.

“I would like to see Janice of state Attorney General. :)”

That would make me happy beyond words as well and also make up for some of the fearmongers who have expressed interest at running in the past. For example, when Lou Corea got hids money ripped off by some woman who also ripped off money from some other prominant democrats, one of the funds that got ripped off was “Lou Corea for Attorney General’ Fund. I recall this guy being the same idiot who tried to preempt State law, but was at least samrt enough not to follow through on it. This guy Corea is an example of how Orange County democrats can be as screwed up or more than Orange Republicans ( if thats even possible ).

Anonymously, very good analysis. Maybe they could put this in the blog section of this site or you could submit this on another site about CA politics. One thing I would like to see added is how the fall of people’s real wages across the board, except for a tiny few who are benefiting, has fed into the support of these laws, that trend to blame the sense of insecurity, mainly economic, on certain despised groups that divert attention from who is actually creating the environment of insecurity — the people in power.

Some of this s.. stuff just amazes me;

On the bright side it looks like he wont have to register, so he can still hang at parks and other “child safety zones” in Florida (which is very tough on RCs)

Not suggesting that this guy didn’t do something totally inappropriate and/or unacceptable but without having the details it doesn’t seem fair that the article is calling the girl a “victim”. Based on the article it sounds to me like the minor sent this guy naked pics of herself. If she was 18 and did this she might be labeled “trashy” but since she was under 18 she’s automatically a victim. What if she wanted to send him naked pics of herself. If this guy is going to pay dearly for possession of CP…they better charge her with possession and distribution if she wasn’t forced to take and send them.

Are we now working up to a local law to ban registrants from riding transit? LA County Metropolitan Transportation district — which is always complaining it doesn’t have enough money – is now spending money on research to determine if riders are being confronted with sex offenses! They have been asking passengers and compiling statistics and quoting arrests. And now it is hyped in the Los Angeles Times:

I find this a bit scary. How could this be a high priority. And even the responses: Just how were the questions worded? They’re asking if people have been touched inappropriately — yes, I have been, but not sexually. But now, anyone who was bumped into rudely as someone tried to get past will be marked up as a sex offense, because of a poorly worded question.

I just can’t see how this expenditure happened – without some idea that it will later serve as the basis to ban registrants from transit, just as they would ban registrants from every place else.

It is most likely people other than RC. Bumping and brushing people in public is not a crime.

After replying to a post on a separate thread, I realized that quite a few California teachers have been arrested this year (2015) for sexual offenses against students.So, I decided to see if my conclusion was correct: after a quick Google search, I was easily able to identify 19 separate teachers who have been arrested for allegedly committing a sex offense against a student, just in California, and just this year alone (and it’s only February 21st). I’ll also point out that, while I did not verify this the same way I did for teachers, quite a few police officers were also arrested for inappropriate relations with a minor.

So then I did a search to see how many registered citizens were arrested for a new sex offense: 2!!

Makes you wonder who the REAL threats are!

The REAL threats are anyone who is NOT a registered citizen. Don’t pinpoint this on any singular career type. They only get the news print because of their job, but plenty others who are your average Joes/Janes do NOT get the print. I already know of 3 people who had charges far worse than what I had and their names never ended up in print. Neither was a teacher nor a police officer.

While the ruling is completely irrelevant to us, I found this quote to be absolutely pertinent to registered citizens:

In a ruling issued today by James E. Boasberg, United States District Judge in Washington D.C., Boasberg writes on page 37, “Incantation of the magic words ‘national security’ without further substantiation is simply not enough to justify significant deprivations of liberty.”

Replace the words “national security”, with “to protect the children”, or “even if it saves just one child”, or “one is too many”; you get the idea.

Either way, I thought it was worthy of sharing.

I spent the morning reading this article and found it very, very interesting. Those with a better understanding of “legalese” could surely apply some of the cases cited in the past to those many face today. If you have a lot of time, read this, certainly the history is beneficial to us understanding how California has enacted the harsh laws that plague us today. After reading the article, I feel that little has changed in California since the early 1900’s.


Timmr, thanks for the compliment. I didn’t touch on a few things. I didn’t touch on 9/11’s effect as well as not touching on wage decrease and then blaming this on despised groups to divert attention from those causing the economic insecurity.

The Nixon shock is why wages went down. It caused inflation, which is the reason wages went down. The Nixon shick was basically caused by massive spending in Vietnam and all the tough on crime progams Nixon came up with. Nixon did the Controlled Substance Act, Safe Streets Act, various anti-gun laws, the RICO Act which was intended for organized crime but vague enough to be applied to a lot more, In the 80’s, RICO was applied to Huntington Beach cops for writing tickets to a bunch of people who didn’t break the law, for instance. Nixon asnd his Treasury Secretary Connelly got rid of Breton Woods, a quasi-gold standard, similar to a true gold standard. So banking and financial institutions ran wild, even though Glass-Steagall and other regulations were not yet repealed.

The political distraction of tough on crime to divert attention away from the wage decrease has worked quite so far in the 21st century and also for the last quarter of the 20th century. It got Pete Wilson, in California, elected and re-elected, like it helped his mentior, Richard Nixon. Wilson got into politics working for Nixon and was Nixon’s campaign manager in Nixon’s 1962 run for Governor. Tough in crime got Nixon elected, but not in his failed run for Gov in 1962, which he lost as well as losing a run for President in 1960 to Kennedy. Luckily, ‘tough on crime’ scapegoating doesn’t always work.

I see this haven’t been post yet but it will so I m going to post my comment here and repost it later when this show up..

What happen if we 50 RC the more the better.. in LA or any country walk in and say..

“We don’t have to register ”

That alone will tied up everything and possibility bankruptcy a small county or city.

For example, Stayner trail cost taxpayers $3 million.

Civil disobedience in the form of hundreds of people who are required to register, going in to police stations for the sole purpose of refusing, would get this issue in front of the Supreme Court and would eventually (in my opinion) result in the overturn of registry laws.

But the cost… in terms of ruined lives that we’ve rebuilt… Damn. Anyone who did so would be truly heroic. I don’t think I’m strong enough.

So I went in today for my yearly as a walk-in as I have done for 20 years. After waiting over an hour I was told they are too busy call and make an appointment for thursday. So I call to make an appointment for thursday and they are booked solid. I am told they can take me tuesday the 3rd. So my birthday was monday and I will be past the 5 days after my required time to register. I was told I would be fine but who the hell knows? I also had a colonoscopy scheduled for the 3rd which I will now have to cancel. More time more hassle.
I would recommend anyone going to Van Nuys call and make an appt. 818 374-9675

Sounds like you will merely be trading one colonoscopy for another on the 3rd 🙂

Seriously – I do not see how ‘they’ can tell you it is okay to break the law. ‘They’ are ‘Law Enforcement’ – not “Law Interpretation’. Good luck with that.

This sort of thing must be documented in detail to show the punitive nature of PC 290. It is far from ‘filling out a Price Club Application’.

“Sounds like you will merely be trading one colonoscopy for another on the 3rd”

Hahaha! Perfect, Joe. Perfect.

Actually, I’d prefer the colonoscopy. When I got mine last year they made me comfortably numb first!

Talk about adding insult to injury!

This is yet one more example of what we are all talking about! WE (those who jump through all hoops – cross all the “t”s and dot all the “i”s ) we are the ones continue to get dismissed, marginalized, and simply treated as if we are criminals!

We might have done something (not all of us are guilty – just caught up in this mess) and try as we might to move forward and even to do just as they DEMAND of us we are still mistreated!

“The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them.
One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for man to live without breaking laws.”
– Ayn Rand, 1957

Talk to a lawyer ASAP.

Ask to get that waiver in writing on city pd letterhead. If it is not in writing, it does not exist. They would hold you to the same if the situation were reversed.
I would go down to the PD and sign in at the desk and put reg on the log. Even if
you don’t have an actual appointment, just to make sure you are on written record as having presented yourself within the time period.

I did my annual at VN this a.m., scheduling in advance for 5:30 a.m. in order to get in and out as quickly as possible. So much for that. Two female detectives opened the door and one asked why I was back when I was just there a few days ago. That pretty much set the tone for the rest of the longest registration session in 21 years: confusion.

They were not rude at all. One was training the other, but the trainee I remember from last year. She registered me, or at least participated. The other girl kept dumping on all the previous people doing the registration – they did a shoddy job and did not get all the necessary info. The trainee – the one from last year – just nodded in agreement.

I was not a happy camper going in. I used to be proud of my post-prison accomplishments having built a successful life by any standard and did not mind the process so much. But since the Megan’s Law site went up I have been increasingly bitter every year and quite resentful toward the cops and the system. I used to be friendly, but now remain completely aloof and don’t say anything beyond what is asked of me.

Today was a challenge – they wanted me to provide details of the night of my crime 28 years ago and re-live the experience because they “need to complete the MO section of the form.” This was in a room with two other registrants who were not asked these details. It took at least 20 minutes longer than necessary. I tried to impress upon her the awkwardness of questions and she offered to go in the hall or “an interview room upstairs.” Yea, right.

It seems a bit unfair when people convicted of far worse are not forced to register and relive their lowest moments annually. “So, walk me through your thought process. What was going though your mind when you pulled the trigger?”

Or the drunk driver, “So, when you were driving with a suspended license and hit that minivan, what was going through your mind as it burst into flames and the family died?”

Or the repeat customer at the Family Planning clinic, “So, what’s going through your head as the tiny life is sucked from within you?”

OK, that last one is not a crime, but you get my point.

Yes, it was a long morning – the other cops processed two other people while I sat there listening to the one training the other. I finally told her that I don’t recall what happened – it was a long time ago, and finally she acquiesced and put “Doesn’t remember” in the form. It almost felt like she would get Brownie Points for having more info on the form and when she gave up I was reminded of the sales guy at Best Buy finally giving up on selling me that extended warranty. In all seriousness, for the first time I felt like I should have had a lawyer with me. Maybe I will next time. One thing is for sure, I’ll try and go in with a better attitude.

Thanks for letting me vent.

Thanks for sharing that they are asking to re-hash events 20 years ago. I was asked to do that my first time registering and haven’t been asked since. I would bet they are asking for THEIR training purposes. I will respectfully decline to answer and remind them it’s all in my report that they have in front of them as I don’t feel the need to further humiliate myself. I was also told when I “made my reservation” for the 3rd to bring a piece of mail to verify my address. Never been asked to do that before either.

The procedure / legal requirements for the registration process is outlined in PC 290.015. (on the official CA web site)

This section is duplicated – scroll down a bit. Possibly because of confusion about Internet Identifiers, which has been settled (Prop 35).

Remember – you are NOT required to report internet and ISP identifiers.

(5) or (8) reads:

Copies of adequate proof of residence, which shall be limited
to a California driver’s license, California identification card,
recent rent or utility receipt, printed personalized checks or other
recent banking documents showing that person’s name and address, or
any other information that the registering official believes is

Copy – Paste – Print. Quote as necessary.

There is NOTHING about an offense narrative. What is the “MO Section”?

ps. @C – if ‘training’ someone to gather and input this information takes longer than one year maybe the tax payer needs to be made aware of this.

I’m happy you took the opportunity to vent. Whatever helps anyone get along with their life is good with me.

I started getting angry as I read your words, as my own experiences and reactions have been so similar to what you shared. I too have become more and more bitter about this process over the years and also go in with a taciturn attitude. I’m at my worst when they come to my home on one of their little residency confirmation expeditions. I’m pretty curt and rude – “What?” “Yep” “Right”… and no “goodbye”.

Let’s think about the 10’s of thousands of work hours that law enforcement puts into registering and confirming. Are these detective good at what they do? If so, how much more efficient could they be in using all of those hours to actually solve CRIMES? There’s a crazy thought, huh?

I actually wouldn’t mind the visit so much if they were here specifically because there was an unresolved issue in our neighborhood and they politely introduced themselves and said something like, “we’re sorry to bother you, sir, but we’re working an active case and if we can just quickly eliminate you as a suspect then we get that much closer to getting a bad person out your neighborhood”. It’s still a bit insulting (after 40 years) but at least I could feel like they are doing their job, rather than busywork which unnecessarily harasses me.

I moved a couple years ago and became friends with my neighbors. One day, my neighbor called me at work. They had never called me before, so I was surprised. She explained that there was a police officer there who wanted to speak to me. The inappropriately titled “detective” said she was trying to conduct a 290 residency check and did I actually live there because she had come by several times and never found me home.
Well, I drove home from work immediately to confirm to her that I did, in fact, live there.
But seriously, what a pathetic excuse for a “detective”! My file clearly indicates that I work a regular 9-5 job and am therefore not home during the day.
Are they too lazy to read the file that is right in their hands?? I’m surprised they can safely cross a street without supervision!
Thanks for allowing my rant.

David, as I said in my comment to “C” up above this one – what an incredible waste of policing resources to spend their time on this type of activity!

They should simply work their active case files and in the course of doing so they might end up going to the residences of many different former offenders. They might then actually eliminate suspects, solve a crime and if… IF… someone they wanted to interview didn’t actually live where they claimed then they would have a new active case, wouldn’t they?

This has nothing to do with police work and everything to do with politics and CYA. The checks only started after high profile cases and, like a lot of things that changed, post 9/11 hysteria. Osama won.

c, I agree 100%. People were so scared after 9/11 that they allowed the government to revoke our civil liberties and VOILA! the terrorist won! The Constitution was usurped and we did indeed change our way of life, just like the terrorists set out to do.

As a dreamer of better things, I thought of this scenario. While challenging the punitive nature of current SO laws, I’d like to walk into court with a chicken on a leash. Of course, I’d be asked why I have a chicken on a leash, but I’d respond, that’s not a chicken, it’s my seeing eye dog. Their response would be further questions, but my answer is, it’s my seeing eye dog because I said it is. Kind of like the difference (or similarity) between penalty and punishment. I’ll keep dreaming on…

Doesn’t matter what you call it, if it looks like crap and smells like crap it’s not a rose!

mch, I’ve said it many times – tell me all you want that this isn’t an ex post facto punishment, but rather a “public safety measure”, but I know punishment when I feel it and this is definitely punitive. Like the Supreme Court justice once said, I might not be able to define pornography but I know it when I see it. I like this analogy because these registries are more pornographic than any “dirty” picture.

Question. How can i find out what level SO iam? Trying to figure out how stuff will affect me. In ca convict 261.5d/c. Thanks

Question: Which are the four States with lifetime registration?
1. California. 2. Florida 3. ? 4. ?

Alabama, California, Florida and South Carolina

California – forever the Great Paradox. 3 hard-core Red States and the supposedly liberal “left coast” State of California.

I believe that the life-time requirement in California is more a function of history than the state’s overall ideology or blueness.

See here (everyone should know what happened here)

I do believe in the “red-neck” circles, that sex among men/boys or women/girl are horrendous were as sex among man/older girl or woman/boys is acceptable.

I started reading this thread, even though it’s March 1 …and I was appalled at some of the comments. Those who do not read history, are doomed to repeat it. The amount of fractionalization, marginalization and downright elitism I see in this movement, makes me sad. E.g., “My dog is bigger than your dog” because it’s my husband who offended, versus your son. Because my case is Federal, and yours is State. Because yours was a hands-on offense, and mine was merely virtual. Because mine was juvenile, and yours was adult. Et cetera, ad nauseum. Do you think anyone really parses the registry, when they look at it with the intent to do harm, and do rational calculus on a person’s age, crime, or “risk of reoffending”? No – because those who intend to do harm to Registrants, are not rational. Please …read your history. Dividing and conquering a population ALWAYS enables the colonizers/oppressors to win. Think of India and the British — how did a small island population manage to control an entire subcontinent? What happened in 1947? Think of how people of color are treated in the USA – turned against each other rather than united against an oppressive and abusive government. And please children stop bickering.

Yes, like the Native Americans fighting among themselves while the Europeans pushed one tribe after another off their land. But on the other hand the victor knew how to squash any attempts to unify against a common cause, because that scared it more tgan anything else. Whether it was the ghost dance that was squashed at Wounded Knee or Occupy encampments gutted in all the major cities, be aware that every tool that can be used will be used to halt a determined and desperate group from forming alliances.

Thank you! I completely agree. Ever since the idea of a tiered registry bill, I’ve seen nothing but bickering and arguing that came loudly from those who were opposed to the idea because they were most concerned about how it could negatively impact them. It was always “me me me” with their lamenting about how they shouldn’t be sacrificed for a few people who would be dropped off the registry. Well those people can just give themselves a pat on the back because they got exactly what they wanted when no one in the legislature put their name to the bill.

I have refused to complain about my situation because unlike many on this site, I’m not on a public registry. I live in a liberal mecca where law enforcement leaves registrants alone to live their law-abiding lives and where the whole region doesn’t have presence restrictions. What I do give is empathy for those who are feeling at their lowest. I’ve noticed that empathy is sorely lacking among some of the commenters here. But what we really need here is some solidarity.

Easy to say when you are not impacted.

My friend committed his crime over 30 years ago, and still no one will let him live near them. These laws treat people in a way that keeps them down for the rest of their lives….Oh, I see – let’s make laws that ruin people’s ability to live a decent place for the rest of their life even thogh they have served their sentence, and have never re-committed in 30 years time…Completely ridiculous. Can’t even buy a home because a home owner association won’t let you live there. Not letting people be successful and live a decent quality of life only pushes them down and criminalizes them….Keep criminalizing a person, and sooner or later you’ll get a criminal. It’s all a mind game to make crappy people feel better about themselves…Hello? A child molester can easily get in his car and steal your children away, or break into your home to get them…A rapist can follow you from work, he doesn’t need to live with 100 feet of you….Actually, the smart rapist will not target his neighbor…These lawmakers are sooooooo stupid…Total false safety the pitch to the public…These sex offender laws DO NOT keep you safe..A repeat offender will not be stopped by these frivilous laws…He will get in his car and find you…He Stalk through the malls and the public places, and follow you home, and snatch your wife or children away….Sorry, I hate to put it to you like that, but think about – these laws do nothing for any of the victims that have ever been, and will do nothing for the ones still to come…btw, sex offenders have the lowest rate of recidivism.

Stupid People!