ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

ACSOLCaliforniaGeneral News

Public Safety Committee Chairman Stops SB 448

Public Safety Committee Chairman Bill Quirk stopped Senate Bill 448 from being passed in the Assembly yesterday when he refused to conduct a hearing on that bill.  He took that action despite a Rules Committee ruling that suspended both an Assembly rule and the State Constitution.

“Chairman Quirk is to be commended for his courage and his integrity,” stated CA RSOL president Janice Bellucci.  “He protected the U.S. Constitution as well as the civil rights of registered citizens when he stopped SB 448.”

Prior to the Chairman’s act, SB 448 was poised for passage on September 11, the last day of the legislative session due to the lobbying efforts of Facebook billionaire Chris Kelly.  Before the bill could be considered by the full Assembly, however, it required approval by the Public Safety Committee.

“Kelly attempted a brazen attack upon the First Amendment as well as upon registered citizens in his support for SB 448,” stated Bellucci.  “If passed, SB 448 would have stolen the First Amendment rights of thousands of Californians.”

In addition to his support for SB 448, Kelly is the primary financial contributor of Proposition 35, which also required disclosure of internet identifiers.  Kelly is also a party in a lawsuit filed by the ACLU of San Francisco that stopped implementation of that requirement.  Because SB 448 failed to pass, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will make permanent a preliminary injunction granted on November 18, 2014, and the requirement of Prop. 35 to disclose internet identifiers will not be implemented.

—–

Letter from CA RSOL President Janice Bellucci to Assemblymember and Public Safety Committee Chair Bill Quirk – view pdf

SB 448 - Thank You to Quirk - Sep 2015

 

Read all posts about SB 448

Join the discussion

  1. David

    This is excellent news!
    100,000+ California thanks to Committee Chairman Quirk!
    A victory for CARSOL and our nation’s Constitution!
    And, of course, enormous thanks to CARSOL President Janice Bellucci!

  2. Anonymous Nobody

    GREAT news. Thank you so much Janice et al for all the efforts that helped stop this. No wonder Janice has made the top 100 Daily Journal Top Lawyers list.

    But I must add a comment. The committee chairman cannot block a Rules Committee decision to suspend a rule. In fact, if the committee tried to ignore the Rules Committee ruling, the Rules Committee, with the Assembly speaker as chair, can simply pull the matter from the other committee and either hear it itself or simply send it to the floor (or block it itself, but in this case, that would be redundant). That’s the power of the Rules Committee. Whatever went on here, your explanation isn’t quite on the mark — of course, you didn’t say just what rule the Rules Committee suspended. But nonetheless, you, and Quirk, came through for us.

    Quirk needs our support, You can bet now Chris Kelly is going to fund a major challenge to Quirk’s reelection — well, unless he is in his last term. We must not let our supporters in the Legislature be subjected to such threats. At the least, I recommend everyone send him a very deep felt thank you and express support for him and his reelection — although I don’t know, this might be his last term.

    • Anonymous Nobody

      Oh, I also note. We still have to remain vigilant on this. I believe any bill that is not handled at this junction can still be resurrected when the Legislature returns in January.

  3. CA

    Janice- I am truly impressed, Thank You :]

  4. Q

    This is great news indeed! I never knew that Assembly rule and the State Constitution could be suspended. I find this highly disturbing. I suspect I was right when I said someone must have bought (with $$$, influence, or both) most of those traitors to America with money or influence from the other traitor to America, Chris Kelly.

    In another thread I said that perhaps Chairman Bill Quirk had a problem “stifling free speech.” I’m hoping this is the reason he stopped Senate Bill 448. I think we need to know who the honorable men and women are in the sea of sell outs so we can call on them when money mongering anti American pieces of sh_t like Chris Kelly try to buy or use influence on the weaker public servants when trying to undo our constitution and bill of rights.

  5. Timmr

    I don’t understand all that is going on here, but the information you present makes me happy to see there is a courageous and honorable person like Mr. Quirk at the helm of a committee. Whatever his reasons for doing so, he halted a process that compromised the State and US Constitutions, he supported the State’s open meeting laws, and he staved off a costly court challenge that the State would have most likely lost. He looks like the only person of that body who had any sense.
    That being said, I still can’t believe this happened. I get a feeling that they passed this anyway, somehow.

  6. NPS

    This is excellent news indeed! Thank you Janice and all who contributed to this effort to stop SB 448. And of course a big thank you to Assemblyman Quirk. A little background: he represents the 20th district which is the East Bay. For those who don’t know that area, it’s the Hayward area in the SanFrancisco/Oakland/SanJose metro. There is NO WAY any Republican can unseat a Democrat Bay Area representative.

    Quirk is no softy on crime, so I don’t see how Chris Kelly could even think of labeling him as such. Quirk has authored AB909 which requires local law enforcement agencies to track and report on the number of rape kits they collect, test and decide not to test. He’s authored AB2089 to make it easier to get a domestic violence restraining order.

    He assumed office in 2012 so he will have more future elections. Here is his website with contact info: http://asmdc.org/members/a20/

    I’ve already sent a thank you email.

    • Nicholas Maietta

      I tried to respond with a thank you, but i’m not in the same district.

      • NPS

        I’m not in his district either, yet I was still able to send him a thank you e-mail.

      • MarkW-SF

        For this or any other legislator not in your district:

        1. Go to the contact tab or google search the home district office of the legislator to find the city and/or zip code.
        2. In the “Street” field, simply type Street, Avenue, Way, Circle, etc.
        3. In the “Zip Code” field, enter the zip code of the legislator’s home district office.

        You should then be able to send such emails to any legislator.

        Often, once you get through this way, you will receive a direct email address in a reply.

        You can also always call or snail-mail.

        Try, and if it doesn’t work, then come back here, and describe what was missing.

        Essentially, use the legislator’s home district office info to navigate the “form letter” system.

        We also should request that all RC legislation be listed in the dropdown menus for “Topic” or “Legislation/Issue” in these form letters to their offices…….including on the full CA Legislature page that lists status of pending bills/legislation.

        As someone posted on a separate thread when I gave this info – legislators represent all citizens of their state, not just from their districts. And all legislators are sworn to uphold the Constitution.

    • j

      Kelly is wrong and so blinded by greed and opportunism that he seems to believe the constitution is merely a centuries old document on display in a museum for people to ponder every now and then in a historical reference.

      Quirk has the intelligence and fortitude to determine which is real and which is imagined. Can we have at least a handful of legislators with these qualities?
      That would be a start.

      • Q

        I can’t seem to shake the gut feeling that most of these legislators are easily; very easily, seduced by money and favors. I also can’t seem to shake the feeling that selling votes for money and favors is now looked upon as a perk of public service. This moral corruption seems to have become the status quo among this group of people.

        The way this piece of legislation was flying through until Quirk acted on his moral convictions just didn’t smell right. I have been seeing the same suspicious warning signs in areas other than this, like in the vape industry; in spite of overwhelming opposition to over regulation and taxation bills from special interest groups opposed to the vape industry are flying through; I suspect the corrupting influence is coming from the tobacco industry. So, we aren’t the only ones shaking our heads in dis belief when something that is obviously wrong is passed into law.

    • MarkW-SF

      In our letters to Chairman Quirk, let’s ask for a CA Assembly Public Safety Committee investigation (or similar) to finally put an accurate and factual cost analysis together on what RC bureaucracy in CA (and in each district if possible) actually costs.

      Let’s start to show in real numbers the financial folly of these policies, bills, laws, and operational practices — often unconstitutional, or in clear violation of civil/human rights. There was a figure for CA in entirety of $22M un-ascribed tossed out in another thread. Let’s get at some real financial numbers and show the waste of taxpayer money these expenses are, based on empirical evidence and facts…..increasingly evidence and facts coming from government’s own research and reports.

      The billions-dollar partnerships of governments and private businesses on the backs of law-abiding RCs increasingly appears as cases of Racketeering.

  7. MarkW-SF

    Thank you, Janice and all involved here with this!

    Please be sure to send your thanks in emails, letters, and calls to Assembly Public Safety Committee Chairman Bill Quirk.

    And please be sure to send your advisement to the Senate “Public Safety” Committee (especially Hancock and Leno and Anderson) – and Ben Hueso – that the Brown Act, the CA State Constitution, the US Constitution, and the Bill of Rights are strengthened by justice, not political demon-ization and legislative exploitation of law-abiding citizens and their families and loved ones.

    I did my annual birthday requirement this week, and the processing clerk got her usual verbal digs and put-downs toward me personally and the category in general. I kept my mouth shut….up till the end. As I gathered my papers and started to leave, she called out after me snidely: See you next birthday! I turned and walked back. I mentioned I serve on the city reentry council on committee for policy, legislation, and operational practices. Her response: Yeah? How’s that working out for you? I replied: Good….we’re working on that all this is unconstitutional, and also violates my civil rights……and I turned to walk away. She said to my back: NOBODY’s gonna help sex offenders! I turned around, took a step back toward her, stopped, looked her in the eyes, and said: You might be surprised. And turned and walked out.

    Thank you Chairman Bill Quirk. Thank you for showing that proposed bills and legislation should have to pass a constitutionality test before even being discussed. A wonderful and righteous and unfortunately must-have-to-be courageous act that helps celebrate this individual’s birthday, in solidarity with other good-hearted registered citizens.

    To commandeer a local pro sports team’s motto last season: Strength in Numbers!

    Do Not Quit!

    Light and Right will Prevail!

    Reach out to your family, friends, loved ones, and others! You will find more people willing to help that you think! Witness the juries across the country starting to be our advocates as well!

    • j

      That public dis-servant needs to have a letter addressed to her personally about her harassment of registrants which is clearly in violation of the law.

      • Harry

        This officer need to be challenged about her behavior. She should not work another day. Get a lawyer to write a letter to the police chief and arrange a meeting over the matter.

      • Q

        It’s unfortunate that this kind of behavior seems to be the norm for city police registrant officers. Once I was put in a cell with 2 or 3 non registrant gangsta types. This was like 15 years ago and the cop made sure they knew I was a “sex offender” even though the act that landed me on the registry did not involve “sex” and there wasn’t even another human being involved. I just kept my back to the wall and didn’t act scared. As soon as I was put into the cell they looked like they wanted to do something, but (fortunately for me) it looked to me like they lacked the heart.

        The sheriff departments registration officers seem to be of a higher caliber. I’ve never had a problem when registering with the sheriffs dept; it’s been my experience that it’s the city police stations where these marginal types can be found. I suspect it’s not as bad as it was in 2000; but still, these types of registration officers need to be censured.

        • Anonymous Nobody

          Q, your experience in the jail cell is common when serving a term, unfortunately. But I believe you are saying they put you in it when you went in to register — never acceed to that, they cannot restrict you in a cell like that, you are not under sentence. As bad as our courts are, I don’t believe they would allow that as legal, at least not unless the jail cell door were open and you could come and go freely.

          But otherwise, Janice, please be aware of this. I know another guy who was in jail for misdemeanor indecent exposure, misdemeanor, and while he is caucacian, they put him inn a cell with Latinos, and the specifically told them when they put him in there that he was a “Chester,” a child molester. They were going to kill him, they didn’t believe him when he insisted he was not a Chester, was simply in for indecent exposure. He had to get documents to prove to them he was in for indecent exposure, not child molesting. Fortunately, they wanted a few days for him to get them — not easy to get such things when you are behind bars. All that time, he was in very serious danger of being killed.

          This kind of thing needs to be sued over in court — and get a court order statewide barring such comments by officers as a criminal offense. And actually,a suit over who sex offenders are put in cells with should be brought too — they are intentionally being put in cells with people who will bee the most danger to them — sex offenders should be in a separate building or prison.

    • mk

      No sense in getting into it with someone so stupid. Sheesh. Next time wear a birthday hat.
      and yeah, I think I’d be writing a letter to her supervisor. Probably wont do anything but it might make you feel better.

    • G4Change

      One complaint will probably not bring dirt bags like her down. However, several complaints eventually will. People like her think they can bully others who they don’t like. The more they get away with it, the more cocky they get about it. They probably even do it to the people they work with.
      Eventually, they will “step in it.” And, if their employee file is full of complaints, it will make it easier for them to go down in flames.
      The pendulum is starting to swing the other way – not just for registered citizens – but for ALL citizens who have been bullied by cops. It’s getting to the point now that cops are getting prosecuted. Something amazing happened about a week ago in Oregon. Officers threw their own chief under the bus due to his alleged racism and how he ran his department. Bing search: “Oregon cops turn in police chief” and you can read about it. I think this is going to happen more and more until eventually this “Code of Silence” CANCER, which is what enables these cops to get away with what they do, is a thing of the past. Once these cops realize that THEY will be required to report their fellow officers and superiors, then things will change for sure. And, this will trickle down to all of us who have to register.
      We need to get to work. Let’s start writing these bullies up for even the slightest infraction they do to us!!! It’s time!!!

    • Just me

      Next time hand her Janice’s business card
      when she said “nobody helps sex offenders”

  8. SecretTrial Backhallway

    Let the word go forth to this time and place…that the torch has been passed to a new generation…Unwilling to permit the slow Undoing of those human rights that this nation is committed to… .
    President Kennedy’s words then ring true today.
    It is in that regard with gratitude and respect to all involved in these legal efforts… Thank You for protecting the Constitution: EFF, ACLU, Ms.Janice Bellucci , CARSOL, Federal Judge,Ninth Circuit Court, and Chairman Quirk.
    Thank You.

  9. anonymously

    This is great and really puts a smile on my face. Janice, Frank, Chance, all of RSOL. thank you all and all the others SecretTrial Backhallway mentioned. Cyber-nazism took a blow of defeat yesterday ,thanks to all of you.

  10. A

    I am humbled and truly grateful to all of the people responsible for my rights as a citizen. I am only able to contribute a pittance as I have 9 months remaining on my 5 year parole. So I practice, on a daily basis, true citizen choices, as I am now a much better man than before. I don’t have words to express my appreciation for all of your tireless work Janis, Chance, Frank, and everyone else. Thank you.

  11. PR

    This is great news. I too am writing a letter to
    assemblyman Bill Quirk. I will commend him for listening to all those that spoke out against this bill, reading the correspondence that was sent by all of us and for abiding by the oath he took to uphold the constitution. I also thank Janice and RSOL for everything they have done and continue to do.

    And as MarkW-SF stated above there is indeed strength in numbers.

  12. Harry

    I too, want thank Janice and team, all participating RC, families and friends, Chairman Bill Quirk and God, for his Divine help.

  13. Eugene Darden

    This is great that this bill did not pass,but we still have brothers and sisters ,who are scared to fight for there rights. We who are not afraid, should help to encourage are fellow people to stand up, and remember we are always there.

  14. Eric Knight

    While not related to SB-448, Bill Quirk has weighed in before on sex offender issues as the head of the Public Safety Committee. Here is a particular position Quirk held during the OC Park sex offender ban bill last May:

    “Assemblyman Bill Quirk, D-Hayward, who chairs the Public Safety Committee, pointed to ongoing efforts to lessen restrictions on where sex offenders can live, not increase them. Quirk said he was reviewing the bill in relation to the recent state Supreme Court decision as well as a 2014 report by the California Sex Offender Management Board when Brough decided not to have it go through a hearing.

    Quirk noted that the report made five recommendations, “two of which were contrary to the intentions of this legislation,” his chief of staff, Tomasa Dueñas, said in an email. One calls for the state to only restrict where sex offenders can live “on a case by case basis.” The other calls for no laws to be enacted that restrict where all sex offenders can go “because no evidence shows they are effective in reducing sexual re-offending, and they may be counter-productive.”

    As the chairman of the Public Safety Committee in the house, at least HE listens to the CA Sex Offender Management Board as a rational, constitutional-minded representative would, and should be accorded our respect. Everyone should send him a personal letter of thanks to him, as I have, or at least call his office and register a compliment.

    In addition, he is probably our Number 1 proponent in the entire Legislature, mainly because he is the stopgap for any vicious bill. When sex offender issues come up in the future, keep him in the loop no matter if the bill starts in the senate or assembly.

    Snail mail/Phone contact:

    Capitol Office:
    State Capitol
    P.O. Box 942849
    Sacramento, CA 94249-0020
    Tel: (916) 319-2020
    Fax: (916) 319-2120

    District Office:
    22320 Foothill Blvd, Suite 540
    Hayward, CA 94541
    Tel: (510) 583-8818
    Fax: (510) 583-8800

    Email contact: Website submission form at http://asmdc.org/members/a20/contact-me/stay-connected (click “email” button for popup).

    Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/BillQuirkAD20
    Twitter: https://twitter.com/AsmBillQuirk

    • MarkW-SF

      Thank you for this, Eric.
      Great points.

      Somewhere on here in other article/thread, there was mention of an uncited/unascribed statistic that CA spends $22M per year on RC administration and enforcement of illegal, unsound, or counter-productive laws.

      Does anyone know if there is any valid proof of this claim? Such verifiable cited statistics as this could be included in such letters.

      If the CA Senate and Assembly Public Safety Committees (and legislators in general) are interested in CA public safety – they should stop ignoring empirical evidence and fact, and cease putting forward bogus bills to benefit their own political welfare, with self-feeding circular agendas of monied supporters like Chris Kelly and unbased-fear exploiters like the Runners and Hueso.

      Chairman Bill Quirk, as a sound-minded citizen representative, not only upholds civil and constitutional rights – he sets a standard for wise and pragmatic use of tax-payers’ hard-earned dollars going toward true and worthy public safety actions. Not on lazy crap legislation that ends up in courts with civil and constitutional rights lawsuits and injunctions the state will lose.

      My point here is: do we have actual verifiable statistics on how much local or CA agencies spend on enforcement of RC laws? If so, where are they? If not, why not? How can this be investigated and made public? How can this money be better used in communities for all the proven crime-prevention methods known in fair education, mental healthcare, substance treatment, neighborhood clinics, etc etc? Not on increased militarization, surveillance, and containment models by law enforcement’s hammer and tong approach.

      For the civil and constitutional rights attorneys out there: what is Racketeering? Isn’t one definition the offer of a protection from a threat under presentation by uniform of color – when that threat would not exist without the presence or cooperation of uniform of color?

      Racketeering: A racket is a service that is fraudulently offered to solve a problem, such as for a problem that does not actually exist, that will not be put into effect, or that would not otherwise exist if the racket did not exist. Conducting a racket is racketeering.[1] Particularly, the potential problem may be caused by the same party that offers to solve it, although that fact may be concealed, with the specific intent to engender continual patronage for this party. An archetype is the protection racket, wherein a person or group indicates that they could protect a store from potential damage, damage that the same person or group would otherwise inflict, while the correlation of threat and protection may be more or less deniably veiled, distinguishing it from the more direct act of extortion.

      I think we should also look into Racketeering (or even Extortion or Fraud) as an additional media meme or legal meme advocacy path, beyond civil/constitutional rights, and beyond the fraudulent expenditures of tax-payer dollars on unfounded or illegal legislation. RC/RSO enforcement has become at least a multi-billions dollar many-faceted government/business industry in the US and beyond.

      Ira? Chance? Janice? Other civil/constitutional rights attorneys?
      Thoughts on viability, if even as framing as Racketeering in media memes (or letters to legislators)?

      • Eric Knight

        Unfortunately, unless there is actual evidence of personal monetary gain for a politician or his crony, this is how politics have been done for centuries. Most courts give great leeway to legislators and their bills, even if the bills are against facts. This is the price of democracy, though technically we are a republic, in which democratic voting is proxied to representatives as opposed to direct vote.

        • Timmr

          Actually I prefer the representative form of government. Try swaying a mob with reason. Billionaires have the money to spend swaying the crowd with storytelling in the media. Some of our most draconian laws, like Jessica’s Law and the internet identifier part of the CASE act came about through the “democratic” initiative process. All it takes is some billionaire to write up an initiation and throw in some hot button words, like “sex offender”, “predator,” or “human trafficking” and advertise it high and low. Until there is evidence otherwise, I am assuming the automatic approval of SB 448 by all those politicians comes about mainly from a fear that 80% of the voters approved the proposition and how it would look if the politician appeared to go against that.

    • Pedro

      your awesome Eric, your a world of knowledge and that is not taking anything away from the blessing of having Janice as our advocate to truth and justice.

  15. Nicholas Maietta

    Well this makes 3 excellent pieces of news today for me. This one had the potential to push me out of the State of California again.

    Thank you everyone, who pushed to stop this.

  16. someone who cares

    These are great news, and to be honest, they were expected. Thank you Janice and Team for all you do, and all the people who made this happen. It happened, because it is the right thing. People are starting to see the truth, and it will only get better with such a great team we have here.

  17. MM

    this is great news for everyone!!!

  18. CA

    what about the september 15th deadline for the injunction of prop 35? I remember somebody saying last month about it, DOES ANYBODY KNOW ABOUT THAT? JANICE DO YOU KNOW?????????? THATS TOMMORROW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Paul

      I believe, if I read the order correctly, the legislature had until midnight this past Friday to pass a bill that addressed the concerns outlined in the court’s opinion. If they did not pass a bill (which they did not), then the injunction becomes permanent. Therefore, I believe that now, the injunction is permanent and the internet identifiers component of the CASE Act cannot be enforced/required/etc.

  19. MarkW-SF

    Dear Chairperson Quirk,

    Thank you for stopping SB448 by your actions Friday September 11, 2015. This is a welcome sign that a legislator with conscience finally takes his oath to protect the CA and US Constitutions seriously.

    Your action September 11 is considered in the “has-to-be-courageous” category. Many pray for a day it passes into the “of-course-right-is-right” category.

    Approximately 110,000 individuals in CA exist as a Registered Citizen (RC), with significant loss of civil, constitutional, and human rights.

    Established and increasing empirical evidence and facts through government, academic, and professional research proves the vast majority of these RCs are law-abiding – with spouses, children, loved ones, colleagues, neighbors, relatives, friends, and others who are all impacted by the draconian lifetime punishments – yes, punishments – imposed by unfounded, unscientific, and false claims, from those promoting demon-ization for political and personal profit. The numbers impacted are growing exponentially daily.

    Please consider a CA Assembly Public Safety Committee investigation (or similar) to finally put an accurate and factual cost analysis together on what RC bureaucracy and enforcement in CA (and in each district if possible) actually costs. CA estimated costs have been mentioned at $22M range, and more.

    Please visit the work of civil rights attorney Janice Bellucci and CA Reform Sex Offender Laws (CA RSOL) board and constituents when researching further. https://all4consolaws.org/

    CA Senators Hancock and Leno pay lip service to sanity in RC policy and legislation, caving to verbal promises allowing SB448 to pass from committee without final written language, then voting for it in Full Senate. They refuse to carry or find sponsor for tiered or abolished registry.

    You, Sir, notably stood for the individual’s (not the majority’s) rights guaranteed in the CA and US Constitutions, and especially The Bill of Rights.

    Thank you!

  20. TJ

    Just for everyone’s information, which I was not aware of as I was out of state serving my sentence, Mr. Kelly ran for State Attorney General in 2010. This man having worked in the Bill Clinton administration, definitely seems to have political aspirations along with a lot of money. Below is information from Wikipedia on his bio. I was not aware of who he was, and perhaps this will help to clarify for others who this man is. Big money and involved in politics. It does look like money can buy influence in our state legislature.

    Christopher Michael “Chris” Kelly (born August 18, 1970) is an American entrepreneur, attorney, and activist. From September 2005 to August 2009, he served as Chief Privacy Officer, first General Counsel, and Head of Global Public Policy at Facebook. As an early leader at Facebook, he helped shape it into one of the most successful businesses in history. In 2010, Kelly was a candidate in the Democratic Primary for Attorney General of California. Since his departure from Facebook and run for Attorney General, he has become a prominent investor in award-winning independent films, restaurants, and technology start-ups including Path, Loyal3, Fandor, Organizer, and rentLEVER. Kelly became a co-owner of the NBA’s Sacramento Kings in May 2013.

  21. David

    There seems to be some confusion about Chris Kelly’s motives here. It is not an example of big business working to oppress Registrants. It is an example of a liberal Democrat and feminist who happens to be a billionaire sinking his vast resources into advancing a left-wing victimist political agenda. Facebook itself, and Mark Zuckerberg, are very much on the left political spectrum and have pursued an aggressively sex-hysterical and feminist social re-engineering project in which “sex offenders” are to be extirpated from society, a great reason for all of us to abandon the Facebook universe they are creating (but in which we are not welcome anyway).

    To be clear, the right has been just as bad but this is not an example of their work. It is an example of someone with nearly unlimited resources who is now free to pursue his wrong-headed and deeply illiberal ideology and passions. It is a hobby-horse much like that which Hollywood celebrities, such as Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore, love to ride. It makes them feel good about themselves and provides a sense of power as well as adulation by adoring fans. That’s the motivation.

    • Timmr

      I would consider myself a liberal, but I would class what Chris Kelly is doing with registrants as a brand of disguised fascism. Liberals, in my estimation, seek to include everyone in the community. Fascists look to exclude groups of people from the main society and use patriarchal methods of force to achieve their goals.
      Of course, I don’t know who’s what anymore. I just try to look at what they do and go from there.
      On the other hand, I don’t care to know what political leanings Janice carries. All I know is she cares for me and people in situations like mine and that is gold.

  22. anonymously

    David said “There seems to be some confusion about Chris Kelly’s motives here. It is not an example of big business working to oppress Registrants. ”

    Except Kelly never really broke ties with FaceBook when he ran for Atty Gen of California in 2009. He lost in 3rd place and his platform was anti-‘Internet Predator’ whatever that meant, which I suspect would have meant only going after rso’s. Kelly has not stopped pushing these registrant-self-reporting-to-police-internet-identifier laws in states where Kelly first tried to meet and convince the Attornies General to implement his cyber-nazi anti-1st Amendment internet identifier laws, on the FaceBook dime. I don’t know how much stock Kelly still owns in FaceBook, but he’s still working in tandem with FaceBook/Big-Cyber as a major component/proponent of the FaceBook-to-prison pipeline.

    “It is an example of a liberal Democrat and feminist who happens to be a billionaire sinking his vast resources into advancing a left-wing victimist political agenda. Facebook itself, and Mark Zuckerberg, are very much on the left political spectrum and have pursued an aggressively sex-hysterical and feminist social re-engineering project in which “sex offenders” are to be extirpated from society, a great reason for all of us to abandon the”

    Kelly a liberal? I would call him more of a conservadem or a blue dog democrat. He was, of course, a low level staffer in the Bill Clinton administration, fresh out of law school. Kelly must have been in his early 20’s when he worked in the Clinton administration and I doubt he set any policy himself there. To call him a liberal kind of misses the mark since he never proposed anything liberal as far as I know and he did low-level work for Bill Clinton, a conservadem. I think he reached out to Nathan Fletcher, who was a Republican at the time he sponsored Chelsea’s law. Fletcher is now a Democrat, but back then he wasn’t. A few of those organizations that backed Prop 35 and SB 448 are Republican such as those police organizations, victims rights groups and , some of the DA’s that gave support to Prop 35/SB 448, etc.

    It’s interesting that Kelly, during the month of August, while he was heavily stressing out the registrant community in California with SB 448, hosted a Hillary Clinton fundraiser at his home. Hillary is involved in an e-mail scandal where she had her own server for possibly classified data. So at the same time Hillary is trying to minimize the perceived impact of her online behavior, one of her major fundraisers is claiming, without support from the facts, that the on-line behavior of registrants warrants emergency legislation to deprive them of their 1st Amendment rights. Hillary probably would like to stop this unsupported hype of the dangerousness of normal on-line behavior Kelly is drawn to. I am ironically a Hillary supporter. My reasoning is that if Hillary gets taken out of the race, the even worse Andrew Cuomo may jump in the race. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and his AG Eric Schneiderman were instrumental in Kelly’s genesis of attacking the 1st Amendment rights of American citizens. I would rather Hillary who may be influenced by Kelly as President rather than Cuomo whose own agenda is to push for these horrible, nasty and unamerican internet identifier reporting laws on his own. Perhaps Hillary would not let herself be bribed too much or at all by Kelly. Maybe some of the Republican candidates would be better, but definitely not Jeb or Rubio, since they are from Florida and seem to be touting Florida as a model for the rest of the nation. Trump seemed to support Donald Sterling, in his gifts-for-sex/racial commnents scandal, so maybe Trump would also not be so hard on rso’s who had similar lapses of judgement minus the racial comment stuff.

    “a great reason for all of us to abandon the Facebook universe they are creating (but in which we are not welcome anyway).”

    The more prevalent FaceBook becomes in modern life, the more FaceBook needs to change their criminal Terms and Conditions banning registrants.

    “To be clear, the right has been just as bad but this is not an example of their work. It is an example of someone with nearly unlimited resources who is now free to pursue his wrong-headed and deeply illiberal ideology and passions. It is a hobby-horse much like that which Hollywood celebrities, such as Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore, love to ride. It makes them feel good about themselves and provides a sense of power as well as adulation by adoring fans. That’s the motivation.”

    As far as Ashton , Demi and other celebrity involvement in Prop 35, I think they were more taken in by the sex trafficking stuff. I saw an L.A Weekly article that called Ashton out for his already-debunked claim of 300,000 children in the US being involved in sex trafficking. Those 2 I did not hear mention forced-self-reporting of registrants internet identifiers. I think I did see something on Jada Pinkett Smith at a Kelly-attended Prop 35 fundraiser/rally. I also think I heard she was a Scientologist. The late founder of Scientology L. Ron Hubbard once said that his utopia is a’1984′-like society. I wouldn’t be surprised if Kelly is a Scientologist as well since he seems to share the view of utopia being a Big Brother like society.

  23. anonymously

    I just posted a comment but forgot to fill out the name field. Can you please attribute the last comment in response to David, to myself, anonymously. Much appreciated.

  24. Roger

    IMPORTANT: If YOU don’t support CA RSOL and YOU refuse to write letters for issues like SB 448 (YOU know who YOU are :), then consider this: YOU are putting all the work on just a few of us! We are saving YOUR BUTT from a nightmare of presence and residency restrictions, ankle bracelets, no privacy on the internet, and other crap that would make your life a living hell. Without Janice’s leadership, without us giving a few bucks each to CA RSOL, and without us writing letters and visiting the capitol, we would ALL now be facing potential FELONIES for overlooking just one email address in our lifelong reporting of Internet identifiers (read SB 448 if you don’t believe me). Please don’t just sit on the sideline! Click the Donate link on this page. Visit this website weekly. Tells others. PLEASE GET INVOLVED so we can continue to make your life better!

  25. William

    When Kamala “The Faker” Harris leaves office, there is concern Constitution Violator and Aspiring Fear-Monger Wannabe Politician Christopher Michael Kelly — with his degenerate Facebook fortune — will become California’s next Attorney General (as he had tried, but failed, in past election). IF Constitution Violator Chris Kelly successfully uses his illegitimate wealth and irrational influence to be California’s next Attorney General, you can bet our sex offender laws will only worsen and CA RSOL will be placed in a bogged position of having to fight more stupid laws like SB 448, rather than offensive mode. Politicians are generally sick fear-mongers who only care of themselves (not unlike the sex offender who never learned his/her lesson). IMO, there should be community notification and registration laws that require politicians to register with police when they move into a new neighborhood.

  26. William

    Public safety rationale for the Constitution Violator Selfish Politician Hypocrite Community Notification and Registration Act: “Politicians pose a continuous threat in writing laws on hysteria, without rational reason, for their own personal benefit in gaining popularity for election.” This could be in form of voter proposition. I can already imagine the campaign ads: pictures of Chris Kelly, ominus voiceover of how he made his wealth from greed and has pushed laws void of empirical evidence in hopes of capturing the spotlight; Hypocrite Ben Hueso, with video of his DUI arrest and failure to take responsibility for his crime. Scam Artist Politicians George Runner and Sharon Runner, for their continued fear-monger belief in residency restrictions. Maybe a mention of George Runner misusing his government website to benefit him and his wife. What do Kelly-Hueso-Runners have in common? “Creating laws not based on empirical evidence, at the cost of Constitutional Rights; but at the benefit of politicians.”

  27. anonymously

    William wrote “Constitution Violator and Aspiring Fear-Monger Wannabe Politician Christopher Michael Kelly — with his degenerate Facebook fortune — will become California’s next Attorney General (as he had tried, but failed, in past”

    Kelly came in 3rd to Harris, and also lost to some guy who had no money in his campaign fund and no one heard of. Kelly could run again. So it is a good thing SB 448 did not pass. Kelly won’t be able to interpret SB 448 in the harshest way he possibly can because SB 448 was not. Kelly, as Atty Gen, or Kelly influencing the next Atty Gen ( more likely ) will have only thin air to draw some cyber-nazi registrant internet identifier nonsense from , as it stands. For this, I am grateful to Janice, the ACLU, Bill Quirk, EFF, everyone who wrote letters and made phone calls, and anyone who at first believed Hueso and took him at his word that he and Kelly would include tiering in SB 448 and when they did not, may have voiced support to Bill Quirk that he was making a sound decision to defeat SB 448.

    “themselves (not unlike the sex offender who never learned his/her lesson…”

    To give you the benefit of the doubt, I guess you are using the term ‘sex offender’ interchangeably to mean unconvicted perpetrator of sex crimes. But it does look like you are comparing politicians to registrants, who have an under 1% rate of reoffense, and to which your comparision would fall flat.

  28. anonymously

    William wrote “Public safety rationale for the Constitution Violator Selfish Politician Hypocrite Community Notification and Registration Act: “Politicians pose a continuous threat in writing laws on hysteria, without rational reason, for their own personal benefit in gaining popularity for election.” This could be in form of voter proposition. I can already imagine the campaign ads: pictures of Chris Kelly, ominus voiceover of how he made his wealth from greed and has pushed laws void of empirical evidence in hopes of capturing the spotlight; Hypocrite Ben Hueso, with video of his DUI arrest and failure to take responsibility for his crime. Scam Artist Politicians George Runner and Sharon Runner, for their continued fear-monger belief in residency restrictions. Maybe a mention of George Runner misusing his government website to benefit him and his wife. What do Kelly-Hueso-Runners have in common? “Creating laws not based on empirical evidence, at the cost of Constitutional Rights; but at the benefit of politicians.””

    Kelly is not a politician as he hasn’t been elected to any office. So it sounds like he wouldn’t be included in it. So what’s the point? I think the way to go is to expand Sobin’s Idiots registry. But he must be pretty busy with the backlog out in Florida. It appears Foley, Walsh and Lunsford are still in the backlog to be added. Kelly deserves to be there for his Beacon Program at FaceBook, calling himself a ‘Chief Privacy Officer’, then pushing for the cyber-nazi laws of registrant internet identifier self-reporting to law enforcement. Zuckerberg deserves to be there for his FaceMash hacking and cyber-bullying of girls/women, banning registrants from FaceBook in violation of California Penal Code 290 several years later, and working in concert with Kelly’s internet identifier reporting laws in states where Kelly’s money was met with little resistance, to facilitate sending registrants who did not correctly report internet identifiers to prison, in what I call the FaceBook-to-prison pipeline.

  29. DONALD J. TRUMP

    Listen. We have a HUUUGE problem with sex offenders. Just HUUUGE O.K.? I know A LOT of experts, people I deal with, that say we need to ship these rapists back to China, Mexico, and Japan. Right now, Japan sends us cars, we send them beef. That’s NOT a good deal. Listen. I am a REALLY smart guy. I went to the BEST school in the country. I will tell Japan to take all our sex offenders. I will built a wall that will be SO great and big, even BIGGER than Rosie O’Donnell, that none of those rapists will come back again. The wall will be real. Not like Obama’s birth certificate. Listen. No one likes to talk about it, but America NEVER wins any more. I will make a FANTASTIC deal with Putin, who by the way I will get along with great, to give back Snowden for the secrets to the Static-99/R. LISTEN. I am #1 in the polls right now. BY A LOT. Megan Kelly won’t say this because she’s a LOSER. You need someone like me, who by the way has used the laws to my advantage, to turn things around. #MakeAmericaGreatAgain

  30. anonymously

    A lot of weird scenarios and off-base political stuff. Miranda, is that you coming up with all these nicks and just starting your trolling anew with each one?? Anyways, my take on Trump is what I first thought but changed my mind on, that Trump is a shill for Jeb. Trump ran for President before and didn’t come up with all this crazy stuff.

    • Timmr

      I thought this was a good parody, a little heavy on the sarcasm, but then again, looking at some of the outrageous things he has said, I can even believe it came directly from The Donald’s mouth. Of course, he would say that is NOT what he MEANT, and himself in return make fun of my face, or my weight or my military service or my whatever. There is baiting people to get a reaction and then there is good old fashion mockery. This is the latter.

  31. anonymously

    William said “When Kamala “The Faker” Harris leaves office, there is concern Constitution Violator and Aspiring..”

    I do not see a need, to attack anyone who beat back the cyber-nazi Chris Kelly from being Attorney General, and otherwise appears to be a wise person, with silly nicknames.

  32. William

    Facebook’s Chris Kelly is a moron. I look at Chris Kelly’s pictures and he looks like he has power issues (looking down at camera with angry eyes and glaring glasses, as seen on his Wikipedia article). Chris Kelly’s hardline on Registered Sex Offenders is emblematic of Facebook’s superficial and shallow nature. Not only do people have the tendency to portray their artificial selves on Facebook, but Facebook attempts to foster an environment isolated from the fact America is made up of well over 700,000 registered sex offenders (most of whom do not reoffend). As time goes on, karma will catch up to Facebook and fear-monger Chris Kelly. People will realize Facebook is a big waste of time and stop spending so much time on it. The clowns at Facebook will banish into insignificance resembling MySpace. The pendulum will swing the other way. It’s just a question of when.

  33. Ostracized Witch

    FANTASTIC!!

  34. Paul

    Unfortunately, it’s not over. Here’s an important update on the status of SB 448, as well as an amendment that was not included on California’s legislative website:

    https://www.eff.org/document/interveners-status-report

    • curiouser

      Mr. Kelly’s last-gasp attempts. I’m sure the “plaintiffs” will be eager to accomodate him and his slew of attorneys.

    • Timmr

      Were these proposals written into the public record? Never saw these amendments until now, so never had an opportunity to study or comment on them as a citizen of the State of California. Therefore, they never existed as part of SB448 in open government. They are memos between parties of a secret government.

    • Joe

      The “true and correct copy of this bill” (amended date 8/18/2015) attached to intervener’s memo is NOT the version that is displayed on the official CA legislature’s web site (amended date 8/18/2015).

      http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/15-16/bill/sen/sb_0401-0450/sb_448_bill_20150818_amended_sen_v96.htm

      One big difference is that it would be no longer retroactive as it applies only to those who have committed a felony requiring 290 registration which involved the internet, after 1/1/2016.

      Another is that the time frame for reporting internet identifiers is now 30 days. Strange way of protecting children, given the contention that the reporting of these identifiers is crucial to our saving our precious kids from these terrible crimes that go on all day long. Watch the law suits roll in if a crime is committed in those first 28 days (four solid weeks) using an unregistered identifier (if anyone were ever so dense to actually register one of their trolling names).

      Not making public the latest bill text is depriving you, me and every citizen in this State of the right, no – the obligation, to participate in the democratic process. This bill should be tossed on these grounds alone.

      Not to mention the Public Safety committee approving a bill with text to be filled in later. These back-room dealings are not worthy of the (self-proclaimed) democratic leader of the ‘free’ world.

      • Joe

        Oh, and that super-secret “true and correct” copy of the bill lists one Sen. Runner as Co-Sponsor. When did she jump on that bandwagon? Right after her residency restriction went down in flames? That woman just does not know when to quit. Seriously.

      • Timmr

        I would hope the court takes notice of the way they pushed through SB 448. Just what were the proponents of SB 448 afraid of, that they had to circumvent the normal democratic process? Surely, it did not matter to our illustrious leaders what the bill said in it, as long as it looked like it made life worse for registrants. They could have a bill that said all sex offenders must wear silly hats or face arrest and be water boarded and it would probably pass the legislature unanimously. So why the shenanigans? I guess they really did not want any more of our comments in the public record.

  35. Paul

    Anyone have any idea how today’s hearing went? There’s no new information on EFF’s website, so just curious.

    Thanks.

  36. Paul

    Got the update, and it’s not good.

    Proponents requested more time to pass legislation resolving this matter, and the judge granted it, allowing the legislature until March 21, 2016 to pass a law that passes constitutional muster.

    The case is, once again, deferred until that time. Both parties must file an update no later than March 19th, 2016, bringing the judge up to date on the current status of the law. Also, it should be pointed out that the legislature did not “kill” the bill. It’s simply paused until they return. This thing could fly through the legislature and land on the governor’s desk the moment they return.

    Here’s the official legal update: https://www.eff.org/files/2015/10/26/prop_35_sched_order.pdf

  37. anonymously

    Paul wrote “Got the update, and it’s not good”

    Got the update, and it’s all good. This thing died like the tiered registry unfortunately did. But it does bother me this canard still seems to have emergency status. Without SB 448, nothing bad has happened. So obviously, this cyber-Nazi nonsense is not an emergency.

    “Proponents requested more time to pass legislation resolving this matter, and the judge granted it, allowing the legislature until March 21, 2016 to pass a law that passes constitutional muster.

    The case is, once again, deferred until that time. Both parties must file an update no later than March 19th, 2016, bringing the judge up to date on the current status of the law. Also, it should be pointed out that the legislature did not “kill” the bill. It’s simply paused until they return. This thing could fly through the legislature and land on the governor’s desk the moment they return.”

    Hopefully, the tiered registry will be there instead since it has the same status as SB 448.

  38. Timmr

    SB 448 was amended in the Assembly on January 4. It is destined to go back to the Public Safety Committee. When? I don’t know. Anyone? Since there is not much we can do about the passport identifiers at this time, maybe we should start looking over the changes to SB448, discussing it and composing letters, making calls, to the Public Safety Committee(doing other actions?). I didn’t think this was ever going to end.

    • Friend of RSOL

      Timmr – somebody said earlier on that there were conflicts in the bill – one part making it non-retroactive, and another part canceling that out?

      Seems like this could pass with the amendments?

      I am willing to write a letter to the Public Safety Committee when needed.

      I think the idea of getting involved earlier on is a good one.

      • Timmr

        It was really quite unclear from the State website where the bill was going next. The latest status note was saying it was to be re-heard in the Public Safety Committee. I don’t want to see it even apply non-retroactively if it is still arbitrarily applied. It wouldn’t affect me either way, as written, but these bills get amended later to be more broadly applied later. Nonethless, my self interest is not the main motivation here. I tried to find the video of the supposed meeting on January 4, but couldn’t find a record of a meeting discussing it, except the mention on the “bills” tab that it was amended in the Assembly on January 4. I would like to see what was discussed or if it was some back room amending like last time. I will read the new text. Just afraid it is going to pop up some day like a gopher out of a hole and we won’t get a good shot at whacking it over the head.

        • Friend of RSOL

          I agree completely. My comment about the retroactive part was in response to Mark Leno, I believe, who said, “Come back with an amendment making it non-retroactive” – meaning, it will pass if it is amended. I could be wrong about that. Seems like the way it’s written it’s confusing (of course, as these laws always are). If it was amended again it would definitely be good to look at it. Good analogy about the gopher. This stuff is turning us all into experts in the political process and criminal justice system. Too bad we can’t make a living at it!

        • Timmr

          I don’t feel like an expert, just a baby trying to figure out what is in front of me. I do seem to be spending some time on it. Yeah, hard to make it in politics with a record (maybe as a staffer). Many seem to have gone into law or paralegal. Not for me. I was thinking of moving into journalism. I do like to write. Many of us could make it in an advocacy group that is large enough to actually fund paid staff.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.