Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of April 2015. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil.
Related posts
-
CA Dept. of Justice Statistics Reflect Changes in Registry
The California Depart of Justice (CA DOJ) has provided statistics to the Alliance for Constitutional Sex... -
Child Pornography And Criminal Justice Reform
Source: Dawinder S. Sidhu & Kelsey Robinson Drug offenses lie at the heart of the movement... -
Senators call for audit of TSA’s facial recognition tech as use expands in airports | The Record from Recorded Future News
Source: therecord.media 11/22/24 A bipartisan group of 12 senators on Wednesday sent the Department of Homeland...
This can easily be said for all low to moderate risk rso not just juveniles
. Pennsylvania’s mandatory lifetime registration requirement for the worst juvenile sex offenders is unconstitutional because it assumes all children convicted of sex crimes are likely to commit similar crimes in the future, the state Supreme Court ruled.
Without giving juvenile offenders a chance to prove that they are unlikely to re-offend, the lifetime registration requirement under Pennsylvania’s Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act infringes on children’s rights under the state constitution, the high court ruled.
In fact, the court found, the presumption that all sex offenders are at a high risk of recidivism is untrue when applied to juvenile offenders, as research has shown juvenile sex offenders are far less likely to re-offend than adults.
And because the law already requires individual psychological evaluations for juvenile offenders, it would be reasonable to include an assessment to determine whether a child is actually likely to re-offend, the court said Monday.
The court’s 5-1 decision throws out the provision for lifetime registration as sex offenders for juveniles older than 14 who have been found delinquent of offenses equivalent to the adult crimes of rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse and aggravated indecent assault.
I understand David it just seems the time is ripe for a challenge to prevail. We cant win if we don’t even try.
18 years ago I was arrested for possession of child pornography, and prosecuted in Federal court. I will admit: I am sexually attracted to children under 12 years old. I am not compatible with most adults. 99.99% of the time I get regarded as the odd person out, or taken offense for saying or doing things most everybody else would do. It’s been like that for me all of my life. Even when I got sent to SOT as part of my five year probabtion I was always seen as the “bad kid” who needed to grow up, despite being 100% clean for five years.
When my probabtion ended a former patient from sex offender treatment found me a job. I lied on my application about being convicted for a felony. I needed work so I used the “don’t tell, don’t ask” trick and marked NO. Although it was a good job for eight years I was still largely ignored and seen as the guy who had no business talking to anybody. To improve my social status, I even tried Facebook. All I got was being told to F off by a bunch of people obviously more screwed up than me.
Just on record: since my arrest I have NEVER looked at child pornography, nor have I had contact with children. I almost went back into my CP fueled imposed exile when I was laid off from my job. To the execs it was good riddance to excess space. But even thinking of child pornography reminded me of the worst time in my life before I got into it. That was when I was younger, fatter, sillier, and everyone didn’t give a damn about me – including my own family. As much as it’s comforting to be in my own world of children who will love you matter what you are, like Linkin Park put it I had to break the habit.
I found an alternative that may be creepy to many people, but it is 100% legal and not shared by anyone. That alternative made me love myself before anyone else. That alternative also made me lose 50 pounds and take care of my health. It also made me want a better life for the first time in my existence.
I want to be free of my sex offender requirement. My crime is federal, so I would have to get a pardon from the President himself. I looked at the application for pardoning, but there was a stipulation that required three people to vouch for my character. that’s the problem: I don’t know anybody who will vouch for me because I have nobody but me. If the folks here could help me in any way, then that would be grand.
Thank you for taking time to hear my story.
@ Rob2, I’m glad to hear that you have found something that helps you and that you are building a better life for yourself.
http://www.latimes.com/local/countygovernment/la-me-housing-criminals-20150408-story.html
write your congressman. heres what mine looks like.
Hello Mr McClintock,
Yours truly is a registered sex offender, thanks to the wonderful, vague, overbroad, overreaching, unconstitutional “LAW” that is in place. While I can agree that there ARE sex offenders who should be monitored, there are MANY that pose no threat to the public, and yet their lives and the lives of their FAMILY is put on hold, or torn apart completely. I am a sex offender for having an underage girlfriend. Hardly predatory! The restriction that I can’t live within 2000 feet of a school or park when my crime has NOTHING to do with a school or park is unconstitutional, and I have no choice but to become homeless or go back to prison. The “funny” thing is, when I was on probation, and I had to register as a sex offender, I didn’t have these restrictions.
So even though this is not something any legislator would touch with a 20 foot pole because they believe all “sex offenders are all child molesters and predators” please take a moment out of your busy schedule to do just a little research to see that the registry is inefficient, and expensive. CASOMB is a good place to start. As a fellow conservative, I still believe in basic CIVIL rights for ALL. Even criminals. I did my crime, I did my time. Why am I still being punished, and why is my FAMILY?
Your constituent,
sadandmad
THIS is who the registry is for!
even I am upset about the judges decision! disgusting!
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/judge-657101-kelly-sentence.html
Well I contacted Janice via email asking her if she or the orginization would be willing to assist me in refining and formating this motion into a proper court document or if she could direct me to someone who might be able to and I got a real blunt return message that simply said… No I am not willing to do so… So I will post this motion finished motion here to see if I can get any comments or suggestions before I seek other avenues to get this in court. Please comment. Thanks.
I the plaintiff Michael …………… do hereby bring forth this motion for Injunction relief in the Sacramento County Superior Court in the state of California.
This motion is being brought forth as a as applied challenge to the constitutionality of the sex offender registration requirement and notification laws or Megans law as applied to me on the state and federal levels.
Introduction.
I’m asking the court to grant me permanent injunction relief from the requirement to register as a sex offender and to enjoin any and all local, state and federal entities from enforcing any and all of the sex offender registration requirements and notifications laws and or Megans law as applied to me.
I am a non-violent ,non-contact first time ex-offender from a incident that occurred over ten years ago. There was never any physical contact between myself and any victim. I completed my prison sentence and parole supervision without any incidents or violations despite all the obstacles and conditions of parole that were placed on me because of the sex offender designation. I have been arrest free and a completely law abiding citizen since my release in 2008. I do not believe I pose any risk to the public. I was allready severely punished for my offense and should not be subjected to these registration and notification laws that involve consequences that are grossly disproportionate to my offense.
Governments have an obligation to protect people and take appropriate steps to safeguard the lives of those within its jurisdiction to protect them from violence. One element of that duty is to take measures to deter and prevent crime. They must do so, however, within a human rights framework, which places restrictions on those measures that infringe on the human rights guaranteed to all. A person’s conviction of a crime does not extinguish his or her claim to just treatment at the hands of government.
Sex offender laws interfere with a panoply of protected rights: the rights to privacy, to family and home, to freedom of movement and liberty (including the right to work and to reside where one chooses ), and to physical safety and integrity (including protection from harm by private as well as public actors). None of these rights are absolute. But laws that infringe upon them must be necessary to serve a legitimate public interest, the relationship between the interest and the means chosen to advance it must be a close one, and the laws must be the least restrictive possible, they must be proportionate to the interest to be protected.
The principle of “proportionality” as it applies to assessing the legitimacy of restrictions imposed on human rights is used to ensure that rights are not denied arbitrarily, and that any human rights restrictions are rational and evidence-based.
The government cannot allow rights to be taken away “based solely upon the category of the crime for which the offender is found guilty.”
The issues being brought forth are the following.
There are a multitude of constitutional violations that I will outline in this motion and that I would like this court to consider and address.
1. The sex offender registration requirement and notification laws violate my fundamental constitutional right to my liberty and movement by severely infringing on my ability to travel both interstate and intrastate and also international travel. With all the different state laws and local ordinances that are in place it makes it virtually impossible for me to travel in this country without a very real potential for violating one of these laws or ordinances. It is a violation of my fundamental right to liberty and to travel in this country. The registration and notification laws makes it impossible for me to travel to almost all of the major countries in the world as they are notified by our government of my registration status so therefore I am denied entry. These are not minor inconviences and limited collateral consequences of registration but are major violations of my fundamental rights to liberty and to travel both in and out of this country.
The Bill of Rights lists specifically enumerated rights. The Supreme Court has extended fundamental rights by recognizing several fundamental rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution, including but not limited to:
The right to interstate travel. The right to intrastate travel.
Any restrictions a government statute or policy places on these rights are evaluated with strict scrutiny.
2. The sex offender registration and notification laws violate my fundamental privacy rights by making public my personal address and current photo which is not public information and which puts me in physical harm every time I enter or leave my home and even while I’m in my home I can not feel safe. That information being made public puts not only myself but my families lifes and property in danger of physical harm, harrasment and vandalism. These claims are not an exaggeration and the possibilities of these incidents occurring are real and in fact some have allready occurred in my case. This is not a minor collateral consequence of registration but a major violation of my fundamental right to privacy. The Megans law website also displays my criminal record that is only available to authorized individuals who meet certain criteria and have a need to know basis, not to the general public at a click of a computer mouse.
3. The sex offender registration and notification laws violate my fundamental constitutional right to be free from unreasonable, arbitrary, and oppressive official action.
A. It is unreasonable as it severely infringes on my fundamental rights while not achieving any legitimate legislative purpose of protecting the public or reducing crime as demostrated in the following reports.
California sex offender management board (CASOMB) 2014 report.
Under the current system many local registaring agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry.
Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the lifes of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernable benefit in terms of community safety.
The full report is availible online at.
http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=231
The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483
Conclusion.
The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of noneffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates.
The full report is availible online at.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658483
National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America.
The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses.
The full report is available online at.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=247350
These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject throughout the academic community.
The fact that the courts have previously stated that registration and notification laws are minor collateral consequences of a regulatory scheme is simply unreasonable to conclude based on the severity of those consequences I endure because of the registration and notification laws. The court should not rely on and reiterate the statements and opinions of the legislators or the courts in previous decisions as to the need for the laws because of the high recidivism rates and the high risk offenders pose to the public which simply is not true and is pure hyperbole and fiction. The court should rely on facts and data collected and submitted in reports from credible sources and experts in the fields such as the following.
SEX OFFENDER RECIDIVISM ANALYSIS
A State-by-State Comparison of Recidivism Rates Between Sex Offenders and All Felony Offenders (1983-2010)
© 2010 Sam Caldwell. All Rights Reserved.
Summary
The following is a collection of recidivism studies comparing the failure rate of all felony offenders to the failure rate of sex offenders who have committed a new sex crime. All of the studies presented on this page are carefully selected state-sponsored studies, authorized by either the federal Government (US Department of Justice) or the several state legislatures and their respective state agencies. Every effort has been made to eliminate purely academic or politically motivated research.
The findings in this analysis stand in contrast to conventional wisdom perpetuated during the 1990s. It is a false assumption that sex offender recidivism rates are higher than non-sex offenders. It is also a myth that the majority of sex crimes are committed by convicted or registered sex offenders. Further it is a myth that the many hours of legislative testimony on this subject is backed by research, as the majority of all research on this subject shows that (a) sex offender and overall recidivism varies from state to state as a result of policies enacted in a given state, and (b) sex offender recidivism is surprisingly lower than previously reported by political figures or the media. In fact, as this analysis concludes, the average recidivism rate reported by the studies collected herein is approximately 9%, compared to an average 42% recidivism for all felony offenders.
The full report is available online at.
http://recidivism.me/
5 PERCENT OF SEX OFFENDERS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER SEX CRIME WITHIN 3 YEARS OF PRISON RELEASE
WASHINGTON, D.C.—Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today.
The full report is available online at.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm
Document Title: A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013
Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up
The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates.
The full report is available online at.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf
Once again, These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of reports on this subject throughout the academic community.
Making information about sex offenders publicly available significantly increases recidivism rates. This is because making sex offender information public increases offender stress and also makes the thought of returning to prison less threatening, as some sex offenders may feel returning to prison is not significantly worse than being on the public registry.
B. These laws are arbitrary as they are applied in a blanket enforcement policy that makes no distinctions between myself and those who may or may not pose any risk to the public and provides no due process to make those determinations.
C. These laws are oppressive as they affect and limit employment as very few employers will hire me or any registered sex offender simply because they are on a website that is accessible to the general public. These laws are also oppressive because they restrict or limit my ability to travel for work or to be employed by local, state or federal agencies and severely affects my ability to obtain a business licence or small business loans. They also limit what professions and careers that I can pursue. Also my personal and professional relationships are affected in a severely negative way because of my inclusion on the Megans law website and the registry.
These issues are not minor inconveniences but are major obstacles to my financial stability and to my fundamental right to life and liberty for me and my family.
It also affects housing because very few property owners or property management organizations will rent to me or any registered sex offender for fear of vandalism and or the loss of present or potential tenants because of the accessibility to the registry by the general public. I am also denied gov. benefits such as hud or section 8 housing.
These laws are also oppressive as they cause me severe psychosocial stressors that cause major mental and physical disorders which can and do affect my abiity to perform job duties or perform normal daily activities and to reintegrate into society. My psychology reports by the parole department states that I was being subjected to severe psychosocial stressors because of the sex offender registration and notification laws as applied to me.
These laws also create real fears of being the victim of vigilante attacks, harrasment and vandalism which is oppressive as it makes me limit my activities to avoid being outside of my residence for fear of being harmed or harassed. I have had to call the police twice due to my family and I being physically threatened in one instance and having threats and profanity written all over our porch on the second incident. We have had our vehicles vandalized and our lifes threatened because I am subject to these registration and notification laws. These are not exaggerated or isolated incidents that have happened to other people but personal experiences in my case. The official action of requiring me to registar as a sex offender and the official action which includes my inclusion on the Megans law website is the cause of this oppression. These are severe violations of my fundamental rights.
The recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world…
In conclusion.
The sex offender registration and notification laws or Megans law, as applied to me severely violate my fundamental rights to life, liberty,and freedom of movement and my fundamental privacy rights and my fundamental right to be free from unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive official actions without achieving any legitimate legislative purpose.
I pray the court grant me permanent injunction relief and enjoin local, state, and federal agencies from requiring me to register as a sex offender or subjecting me to the notification laws or Megans law under local, state, and federal laws that are unconstitutional for reasons stated above as applied in my case.
Fellow RCs & friends, this opinion piece from the Detroit Free Press may interest you:
http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/columnists/brian-dickerson/2015/04/07/rethinking-sex-registry/25434171/
(The Detroit Free Press is a major newspaper.)
Hmmm, no outrage here?
Soon, the insurance companies will require mandatory lifetime GPS tracking for everyone…
http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/08/technology/security/insurance-data-tracking/index.html?iid=SF_PF_Lead
http://rare.us/story/a-former-high-school-teacher-who-had-sex-with-a-student-is-going-to-jail-but-its-what-the-judge-said-thats-getting-all-of-the-attention/
Now this is a good article that clearly displays the sentencing disparity between men’s and women’s offenses. Go figure…is it because men aren’t sexually appealing “eye candy” to judges, or is it just because we’re low down no good take advantage of women all the time males?
Here’s what happens if a judge shows any sort of leniency or common sense about a sex offender:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-child-molester-sentencing-20150409-story.html#navtype=outfit
The Orange County judge gave a reduced sentence for reasons he cited. Now, the public is outraged and demanding he resign and organizing a recall. Gee, people from around the country are screaming about it!
This is why we can expect zero help from the courts in fighting registration. We are not going to get it from the politicians. WE are the only ones who are going to stand up for us, and we must do so, with more marches, more outreach, more attention. We must all stand up and march — because either the courts nor the politicians are able to. WE have to clear the way to make it so then can.
I wonder if Judge M. Marc Kelly made this decision to lighten the sentence from 25 to life to 10 years based on the circumstances that the defendant stopped the worse crime of sodomy when their mother came looking for the victim and switched to a lesser, but still really bad act, which showed some remorse and could be seen as a mitigating factor. Or if I smell a rat. Maybe this judge is an operative to bring hysteria to the public during the immediate aftermath of the Taylor decision, to get the Gipson/Leyva bills some traction. The only other sex crime defendant this judge ever went easy on was a police officer in a non-contact child stalking offense. Just like the Sodomite Suppression Act may be a ploy to bring down the California Initiative system, so may this Judge’s decision be a ploy to whip up public frenzy against all registrants, and try to thwart the CASOMB, which Spitzer created, but now doesn’t pay attention to, the California Supreme Court and the will of roughly 1/3 of the people, who even in 2006, 30% knew Prop 83 was folly, as the LA Times editorial in 2006 called it. Already, Spitzer, on the John and Ken show, is spitting out bogus arguments of the past. Spitzer said these guys are wired wrong, implying all registrants sodomize toddlers. Spitzer says the last line of defense is the legislators to protect the victims. In the case of the school the Runners founded, Desert Christian Academy, of which Sharon is still on the board of directors, recently a molester teacher/janitor was sentenced for molesting students and the blame for the false sense of security which enabled these crimes lies with the proponents of Prop 83, the Runners, the founders of the school where the molestations occurred. The Runners’ Prop 83 was not a good line of defense but actually aided the perpetrators of the 98% of sex crimes committed by non-registrants, with the false sense of security.
Yep I’m sure this incident and the public outcry and intensive media coverage will spark some new law or spur on the bills mentioned. We all pay the price when some really sexually deviant such as this guy commits an act such as this. Guys like this is the reason there is such hesteria over all rso.
Something I’m a little confused about and am hoping someone may be able to answer.
People who were convicted before the sex offender laws were enacted (obviously not in Cali) and who were sentenced in accordance with the sentencing laws in force at that time, were later informed that they would now have to register under the newly enacted laws. Hearings were created in courts, with judges deciding, to give these people “due process” so that new laws could be enforced upon them for past, resolved matters, legally? Are we to believe that if we are given a hearing, in a court, in front of a judge, that the states can require anything they want of us? More than what we were originally imposed for the offense? Once the imposed sentence is served there is no subject matter for a court to operate on at a later date. How can there be further requirements on something moot? Does the 7th amendmnt omit sex offenses? “The right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in ANY court of the United States, than according to the rules of common law.” How can a hearing be conducted on an issue that no longer has subject matter? Reexaming the issue is not due process it is double jeapordy! If we don’t stop them we won’t even be able to shop at Costco without a hearing!
Thought I’d share:
I’m one of the lucky few in our community who can legally say that I have not been convicted of a felony (per 17B and expungement). I am not on a public registry. I’ve never had a home visit; not even when I was on probation. Law enforcement leaves me alone and the registering officer said, “We’re not looking for people like you. Just live you life.” I do count my blessings, but I also remind myself that not every registrant has it this easy and that I should do my part to inform others of the injustice.
I have been researching Ph.D. programs in my region which leaves only three universities (and they are all highly competitive). I will be visiting the campuses and speaking with program coordinators to see which school would be best for me. Today, I drove down to UC Santa Cruz.
Along my self guided tour, there were some people on campus representing ACLU talking to passers-by about their current mission. They asked to speak with me, so I decided to hear what they had to say. It’s the same fight; marriage equality in all 50 states. He asked if I could commit to the involvement. This was my reply:
I am for marriage equality but I have a much bigger concern for another issue that the ACLU has ignored. In fact, I’m very disappointed in ACLU’s lack of response. [after asking what the cause is] The rights of sex offenders. Now while I am aware that the ACLU is taking action in other states, California’s ACLU has been largely silent. A vast majority of registrants are not the monstrous pedophiles the media would like to have you believe. Many have made a one time mistake for which they are now paying for the rest of their lives. [the ACLU representative agreed] If a crime is committed, then yes, due process should run its course, but upon successful completion of their sentences, that should be it. No more registration. [after stating that he sees how important the issue seems to be] Yes, it is important. The ACLU should start working with CA-RSOL. That is, reform sex offender laws.
He stated that he respected that and shook my hand. Now I know this is not going to be an overnight change, and it’s only a small step in a very long journey, but it is a step nonetheless. It’s one person who is a little more enlightened today than when he woke up this morning.
hello to all and i have a question that needs some guidance
my family is having a family reunion in florida next year and my immediate family are going to attend and we will be attending for 5 days so what do i need to do to avoid any issues
I just watched the Mary Kay __________ interview with Barbara Walters. She stated “Recently I said, ‘It’s been 10 years, why don’t I lift that (registration requirement)?’ ” she told Walters of her status. “There’s a process, there’s a form, you take it to court and then they grant it if it looks like it should be granted.”
Wow, sounds so easy. What a rude awakening she will have when she finds out it’s not so simple. She is a level II. I know we don’t usually mention names here but she put it out there by doing the interview. Overall a good interview that can only help our reform efforts. However on-line comments have not been sympathetic to her after the interview.
Unintended effect of the OC’s 3-yr-old-child-molested uproar….Hispanic communities are often close-knit, so now everyone in that close-knit community knows who the victim is, who the perpetrator is, who ALL the family members are. The pitchfork hysterics are really scarring this already suffering family. The entire family is now being publicly shamed & humiliated. My guess is that the next time a similar crime occurs, it will never, never, never be reported because what family would ever wish to be so publicly & horribly shamed as this suffering family has been.
So the unintended consequence, I can guarantee you, will be more UNDER-reporting of sexual offenses.
I was doing a little research. I found in a case from 2013, People v. Lucas, that the court held that the “clear intent of the probation sections of the Penal Code is to effect the complete rehabilitation of those convicted of crime.”
Well, OK, then there is reason to believe someone who successfully completes probation has been rehabilitated. If so, then why would there be any need of a Certificate of Rehabilitation, which is the start of seeking a pardon and so the review level of a pardon, be needed to stop registering if the probation already shows rehabilitation?!
In fact, this is how it used to be with lifetime registration, at the end of probation and getting 1203.4 relief, you could stop registering. That was the standard to stop, not a COR. 1203.4 has been sometimes referred to as “statutory rehabilitation,” and this court ruling in 2013 tends to agree.
And also, and maybe more useful, if that is what probation is supposed to be doing, then doesn’t that at least trigger the Constitutional right to due process in order to make someone register anyway?! They would have to show you are not rehabilitated.
Instead, we have seen a system evolve – and WE are supporting it with our tier proposal — that completely ignores that the probation laws are there to provide for that rehabilitation and set the standard by which to measure it for each individual, which is the conditions of probation. These assessments as part of the tiers, and even the time frames of them completely undermine the intent of the probation laws! And WE are promoting that.
How about having the tiers apply ONLY when probation was not granted, and otherwise probation rules. Let not our own proposal undermine us! Like I said, probation and 1203.4 relief used to be the standard to stop registering.
Soon we will all just be assigned our own number, based on an algorithm of our life.
290? Plug that into the equation. When I first heard it, I thought it meant for 290 days that made more sense.
As some people continue to spread their hatred by hobbling others that seem easily exploited, I offer this reflection. I was raised, and grew to embrace certain values. One of the first labels I was given going through grade school was gay. I wasn’t old enough to know what that meant. Adults called me compassionate. Innately, I saw people as human beings first. My parents never taught me to exploit others because of their shortcomings. Some things come naturally to people, what I remember was my capacity for compassion, forgiveness, and tolerance; I strived for contentment and understanding. I saw people as intrinsically good, struggling with the need to be a part of, feel useful and needed. I think we are born as a blank slate, only to become shaped through the assimilation of our experiences.
I think we all want happiness and do not want others to suffer. Our misbehavior begin when we feel threatened or misled. Our concepts of life guide us and are constantly tested. When things seem unfair, we are given seemingly rational explanations by our elders for these injustices. As time passes, we analyze these explanations, some pass muster, others don’t. Our education system is geared entirely towards economic development, disregarding a healthy mental well being. People need to be nourished, valued and respected, to feel part of. When we marginalize individuals and groups, there is a destructive process of the host itself. The well being of the entire society is diluted and reduced to one against another. This damaging attitude begins a karmic change that permeates everyone; we are no longer a healthy, symbiotic society helping one another, towards a common good. I hope someday, there is a realization that it may be wise, for the good of society as a whole, to nourish and help heal others. It is easier to work together towards a positive goal, than seek and destroy fellow human beings. There is nothing natural or worthy in the hateful treatment of another. You can see how this negative energy is working around the world. We (society) should be ashamed of these attitudes.
out of Maine –
CRIMINAL LAW: Punitive Effect of Retroactive Application of Sex Offender Registration Requirements
http://www.nlrg.com/legal-content/the-lawletter/criminal-law-punitive-effect-of-retroactive-application-of-sex-offender-registration-requirements
the court found that the duty to comply with SORNA had been imposed on Doe without a judicial trial (another requirement for a bill of attainder) because at the time Doe was sentenced, his crime was not deemed to be a sex offense and, thus, there was no judicial determination that Doe was a sex offender and no judicial order incorporating the registration obligation into his criminal sentence. Finally, as to the other requirement for a bill of attainder, the court found that the SORNA amendment in question may have targeted a specific group based on its members’ prior conduct
I’m getting anxiety.. My yearly is coming up next month… And I only been at my job for 5 months (my 12th one since release) … So far this job seems cool… (I don’t think there was a background check, I didn’t sign any paperwork for credit report or background) roughly no contact with anyone except check in and check out.. it really sucks… so this is my concern… I haven’t generated vacation time or sick days… and I can’t think of any possible excuse to give, its going to look bad if I don’t just show up that day… Hi boss I’m a RSO and I want to thank you for hiring me, but I’m going to have to call out for my annual registration, yes this happens once a year…
Bluewall, can you tell them you have some personal business you need to take care of that you can only do during regular business hours? Or if necessary, can you tell them you have a doctor’s appointment? Be sure to providing your employer with as much advance notice as possible so they can schedule proper coverage for that day.
Greetings to all!
I’ll try to keep this brief as I can and not ramble too much. Forgive me in advance if I do, and if there those offended be spiritual things.
Though all the congregation may benefit, not every sermon is for you. God’s message may be for the person 2 seats over, three rows back. “Let he who has ears to hear, hear.” Regardless of how hard you worked on Monday through Wednesday, and how little you did Thursday and Friday, on Saturday all your clothes (really dirty or barely dirty) are washed together with the same soap and water. In my daily devotional reading, “Good Morning God” (David C. Cook, Harbor House) there is a story about (God’s) principle of reciprocity. Basically, when you expend time, effort, energy, money to help someone else, God heals and makes something stronger in you. Another devotional story is about a businessman walking along the beach the morning after a storm. As he sees hundreds of starfish on the sand which will die when the sun rises, he sees a boy approaching who is throwing the starfish back into the sea. The man asks, “Why are you doing that? There’s no way one person can make a difference. There are too many.” The boy says, “Yes, that’s true.” As he throws another into the see he says, “But I can sure help that one!” A few years back I was lead to the website, http://www.bebroken.com For those out there dealing with the demons that lead to being in this registration nightmare, this may help.
All this is offered to whomever needs this because “WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER.” Seven billion human family members, 800,000 national registered citizens, and 100,000 California registered, we’re all in this together. Maybe the holy spirit led me to share this info to heal something in me.
Peace & Love, Prosperity & Gratitude to us all.