This is my petition to the U.S. district courts in Fresno, CA.Comes now Plaintiff MACK hereinafter referred to as “Mr. ” or “Plaintiff”) complains and alleges as follows:
1. This is a civil action brought by Mr. against the State of California for violations of his civil rights.
2. Mr. brings this action to remedy the deprivation of rights secured to him under the constitution of the United States of America.
3. Mr. alleges that defendant violated the rights reserved under the constitution of the United States of America, by passing Megan’s law which has had a huge impact on his ability to make money or secure the rights given in the constitution to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
4. Mr. in September of 1992 was granted a P.C. 1203.4 that releases him from all penalties and restores all his civil rights. It is an expungement. This means the charges were brought back up again and dismissed.
5. Defendants are aware of the constitution of the United States and that references in the California penal code 290 (hereafter referred to as “Megan’s Law”.) violate his civil rights in that no Ex Post Facto laws be applied to a person that has had all rights restored and charges have been expunged.
6. FACTS TO SUPPORT CLAIMS
I was convicted of 289 P.C. in July of 1987. I was released from custody on or about December of 1987.
I was granted relief under P.C 1203.4 on 9/23/1992. After this I was not required to inform a potential employer that I had a record of any kind. My life was going well, I married, purchased a house, paid my child support and lived the American dream. That is until Megan’s web site was published in 2004.
I was an accomplished computer programmer when in 2004 the information that I had been convicted of a sexual crime was broadcast Megan’s law web site. Programmers were some of the first to investigate the site and I was forced to find a different career.
I began working as a car sales person in 2004. I had left Auto/West Mazda/Subaru for a better job with a Chevrolet dealer in Sacramento. When a background check was run, my conviction appeared, as they had used Megan’s web site to run the check. This was in 2008. Since my charges were expunged, I sued the company that made that decision to use Megan’s web site as grounds for not hiring me and won. It is case no.? adjudicated in Superior Court of the State of California, Country of Sacramento. We settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of money on or about July of 2008. Now I have two careers that are no longer valid. I have been left with no way to again bring a good salary home because of the vast exposure given to my name on Megan’s web site.
I have had my community mail boxes papered with my Megan’s web site picture in 2004 when I lived on Mono way in North Highlands, CA.
I currently moved to a senior’s community and once again I have had my picture passed around and posted from Megan’s web site. I have taken the person responsible to court in Merced County and I have been successful in stopping the posting. This of course does not remove the destruction it has done to my reputation and standing in the community. The case # is ?, 3/16/2011. My reputation here is still ruined and that we can never get back.
I have been called a child molester by neighbors and have lost my reputation. This is a direct result of the continual bombardment by Megan’s web site and now others who are also picking up the information from Megan’s web site and using it to make money on their own web sites. How much degradation must an individual take before it is acknowledged as being Ex Post Facto punishment? Along with that degradation comes loss of income, reputation, community standing, church and friends.
I have recently had my Facebook account deleted, as Facebook somehow found that I am listed on Megan’s Web site as a registered sex offender. According to the law they cannot use this information to discriminate against me. They did it anyway and I do not have the resources to fight them. They are flagrant about the violation. They have responded to my questions about how they determined I was a registered sex offender. They wrote me that is was state and federal web sites that they obtained the information from. This action causes me problems with my business as well as personal life. This again is a result of being placed on Megan’s web site. I tried to explain to them that the charges were dismissed, to no avail. If the government puts it on the internet, it must be the latest and the truth. The web site is a lie, as the charges they have displayed were dismissed in 1992, long before the site was envisioned. This is again Ex Post Facto punishment.
Canada is changing its entry requirements and is including being on Megan’s web site as criteria to not allow travel in Canada. The wife and I wish to travel there in the near future. Do I show my 1203.4(expungement) and hope that is enough? Again this is Ex Post Facto punishment.
Mexico has changed its laws concerning citizenship and land ownership, based on Megan’s web site. Once again Ex Post Facto punishment.
It seems almost every month a new restriction on my freedoms are enacted due to my information being made available on Megan’s web site.
There are penalties for the misuse of Megan’s web site information, but firms still use it, they just don’t mention it anymore. Can the legislature pass laws to stop this? I don’t believe you can. This punishment I am enduring is Ex Post Facto and everyone looking at this, knows that to be true. It has been over 22 years since my charges were expunged and it has only gotten worse for my everyday life..
In April of 2007 during my yearly registration, Roseville, Ca police told me I had to submit a DNA sample as it was now law. I did but again it was Ex Post Facto. Is everything legal to do to a registered sex offender?
In December of 2012 as we were disembarking from a ship when customs called me and my wife aside to ask if I knew I was a registered sex offender and to let me know that they can harass me any time and any place. Again information obtained from Megan’s web site.
I was awarded a Certificate of Rehabilitation on September 26th of 2005 in Superior court of Sacramento. I applied for a Governors pardon and it was denied.
Running a background check on me today will bring up the Megan’s web site listing. Before Megan’s web site there was no record after the P.C. 1203.4 was granted in 1992.
When the State created Megan’s law California legislators must have known that it was an Ex Post Facto law in some cases, but failed to account for individuals like me. Of course my wife has also suffered and had the disrespect and abuse of pious neighbors in the communities we have lived in and also members of various churches who discovered my current picture on Megan’s web site.
Wherefore, Plaintiff MACK demands a swift end to this aggressive behavior by the State of California and prays for judgment as follows:
ON THE CAUSE OF ACTION
1. Have Megan’s law declared unconstitutional because it takes a person who has had a crime expunged and deals with it like it was brand new. It is an Ex Post Facto law and illegal in the United States and the International courts.
2. Immediate injunction on displaying my outdated and misleading information on Megan’s web site.
- - - - - - - - -View all user submitted stories about Living with 290. Feel free to add yours - as a registrant, family member or friend. Please submit any updates on your story via the comments section on this page. Please use the comments below ONLY for input on the story on this page. To add a new story, click here.