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)

General News

International Megan’s Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders’.

The Senate passed HR 515 formerly known as “International Megan’s Law” with another NEW title “International Megan’s Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders” and added a section about Passports. Full Article

Related

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/515

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/515/text

Join the discussion

  1. anonymously

    Looking at Corkers amendment, it also looks like a reciprocation of SORNA implementation as well as IML is being sought to implement in foriegn countries, with money to pay off foreign countries to participate. I do see a pattern. 2001, US attacked on 9/11, Patriot Act not only deals with violent terrorism but also takes on a sex crime jurisdictional focus. 2 years later, in 2003, Smith v Doe, SCOTUS upholds the travesty. Now here we are in 2015, Paris attack, San Bernardino, Trump lets the rage fly and when the public is raging, take the rage against terrorism and misplace it to subjugate registrants.

  2. patience

    I have a 311.1,but in Thailand, porn sites practically don’t exist. I would hope that this could help when applying to travel and eventually settle there.

  3. Euro

    This is beyond absurd. Neither the United States Government nor any of the 50 states care about children one whit. Find out about

    – how many children in this country (US) are abused or killed by their parents
    – how many children in this country (US) live in abject poverty or are extremely disadvantaged
    – how many children in this country (US) are growing up without parents because the parents are incarcerated lengthily for relatively minor offenses
    – how many children in this world have been killed, maimed or massively traumatized by direct US Government involvement in the past year, 10, 20 years (the ones referred to as ‘collateral damage’
    – how many children were killed or gravely wounded very recently in a US government attack on a clearly identified hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan (ignoring the international doctors killed in the attack).
    – how many children in this world toil as child slaves so a mother in Irvine can purchase a pair of jeans for her kids at WalMart for $8.99 or less.

    I call BS on the US Government caring about children. If ANYONE in this world does not care, it is the US Government.

    • Timmr

      Like I said above, the US government cares just for the image it presents of itself. Real live people don’t seem to matter in its policies, just the narrative.

  4. Craig

    Well I guess since they do not want us to leave or have a normal life, we might have to all just settle in one state and make our own laws, to hell with the government.

    • Harry

      Oregon is a good state to consider.

    • Lake County

      If all RC’s and their families picked one state with a low population to move to, our votes would likely be enough to make our lives much easier. This might be our best way to get back our constitutional rights.

      • Craig

        I do know that leaving America is not the best solution, If you can vote you have power, the more votes equal more power. Find a place and vote for the people you want all the way to state level. It might have to come to that one day if we ever want a normal life.

  5. Commenter1

    In Illinois we are preparing a letter to mail to all 18 of our Congressmen/women this week asking them to oppose this senate amendment. I hope someone at CA RSOL is also doing this?

    • Harry

      I will be doing the same, here is CA.

      • Harry

        I sent my letter and this is what I wrote:
        Dear Congressman:
        Opposed to HR 515
        Is this the United States of America? Is this a Nation that market its-self as a land of the free and opportunities? Are we supposed to have a U.S. Constitution, for ALL Americans?
        The United States Government and it States has sinister legacy of promoting hate toward classes of people, such as, the Native Americans, Black Americans, Japanese Americans and now the Registered Americans, whom are called “registered sex offenders”. All of these repulsive campaigns are rooted in un-factual fears, hysteria, lies and bitterness.
        Now, the Senate passed HR 515 formerly known as “International Megan’s Law” with another NEW title “International Megan’s Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders” and added a section about Passports.

        Essentially, all current passports for folks CONVICTED of a sex offense/s MUST be reissued, with the words “SEX OFFENDER” prominently displayed on the passport. And all new passports for folks convicted of sex offenses will be issued with same wording.
        Nearly, all of these Registered Americans, that travel internationally, are reformed and law-abiding citizens. Why is this class of citizens single out? Should USA give advanced notification of ALL other convicted offenders? There is no reason to have this law, except for hatred and harassment by the Federal Government. Vote NO on HR 515.

  6. Craig

    This bill almost is like the final nail in the coffin so to speak, I remember in Louisiana when they placed sex offender on their driver license, I felt so bad for those people, what was the purpose, law enforcement already knew who they were. This is a true gut shot, what can be done? All my letters have been sent and this is the second time I have contacted my REPs in the last month.

  7. PK

    I’m somewhat confused about the specifics of this bill. Is it true that the only RSO’s who must comply with advanced notification of intended international travel, are those RSO’s who were convicted of ANY sex offense, including misdemeanors, whereby the offense occurred within a “SORNA State”? To my knowledge, NY (which is where I was convicted) is not a “SORNA State”. And furthermore, I’m not required to register at all where I live in Washington DC.

  8. anonymously

    D wrote “The only reason is because that is where the conviction was. Their thought is so your victim can know where you live and avoid that area. If all someone knows is that you were convicted in NY, then they can search the ML site in NY to find out where you know live. ”

    And if it was a victimless crime then there is no need for any of this. I think it’s more about heaping on more punishment to weed out the incompetent in the realm of office work. Finding far-fetched good faith motives in this is hard. Kind of similar to why OJ got 9 years for a contentious hold up robbery to supposedly steal back sports memorabilia with his name on it from his Pro Football days. It is about using the legal system for revenge. John Walshs main goal is to sadistically burden registrants as much as and any way he can. That’s why him and Mark Foley increased the frequency of the mandatory appearances 2 and 4 fold for level 2 and level 3 registrants. Increasing your yearly frequency from once every year to once every 3 months serves no purpose other than sadism coming from hypocritical admitted and unconvicted sex offender John Walsh who committed sex crimes no different from Roman Polanski or Bill Cosby. Similarities abound as to the relatively similar ages of their victims and the murders of their close loved ones. The only difference is where Cosby and Polanski didn’t go on a hypocritical mission to blame others like them in aspects other than them not being murderers, John Walsh used himself as a model of those to go punish through gaming the legal system and media through legislation and propaganda to achieve some sort of satisfaction in punishing an artificial class of people created and then scapegoated for the perverse and misplaced pleasure of someone, who had they not taken this offensive and hypocritical tack, would be entitled to some sympathy from anyone who is not a murderer, regardless of conviction for peeing on the side of the road or other victimless so called sex crimes and in many cases lesser sex crimes than those admittedly committed by Walsh and factually committed by Foley, otherwise.

  9. anonymously

    I wrote “coming from hypocritical admitted and unconvicted sex offender John Walsh who committed sex crimes no different from Roman Polanski or Bill Cosby. Similarities abound as to the…”

    I should have wrote “alleged” in Cosby’s case since he hasn’t had his day in court yet.

  10. Justsayin'

    It is interesting how this country is focused on, and also fears, home-grown terrorists, who have been recruited by extremist groups. These terrorist groups prey on the isolated, who have been let down by their country, who have been ostrasized, and who have no hope. Yet,this is exactly what our broken justice system is doing to an entire segment of our society – REGISTERED CITIZENS! The only hope of reversal is to challenge many of these unconstitutional laws, all the way to the SCOTUS.
    We should support new legislation aimed at helping to relieve mass incarcertion; because there is new support for restoring the voting rights of felons, among those who favor the down-sizing of prisons . If voting rights are restored to those who qualify for the registry, the sheer numbers of former offenders with the need to register, would create a substantial voting block to rectify some of the injustice.

  11. Spiff

    Did anybody actually read Bill HR515? I googled it and read what I hope was the latest narrative for that bill. If I am reading it right (I’m not a lawyer) and if my wishful thinking isn’t clouding my judgment, then here are some of the interesting things I noted:
    1. This bill would require the Notification Center to make a “reasonable effort” (whatever that means) to contact the offender prior to their international travel if either a) a notification will be sent to the destination country and b) if there is a strong likelihood of denial of entry into that country. If true, this is an improvement on the current system in place.
    2. There is a Sunset period that states the center’s ability to send out notifications ends once Adam Walsh registration requirements are completed. This is contrary to what most of you are stating above in your comments. Please read the bill for yourself and comment if you see anything contrary to what I am stating here. This is lifechanging stuff here so we all need to fully understand the implications (hiring a lawyer would probably be for the best).

  12. Tim

    We all should contact our Congressman or send a letter to oppose this bill in time. I have sent a letter to my congressman. I like to compose a similar sample letter here for your reference:

    * Sample letter, Please note -this sample letter is a composition, including/contains copy of original section of some others’ good/strong comments in this forum to state our opposition stand for you to easy reference to re-write/adjust to your own version-

    Re:” Strongly Oppose HR 515-International Megan’s Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders’.

    Dear Congressman / Congresswomen…,

    I am writing to you to express our strong opposition to HR 515, “International Megan’s Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes Through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders’”.

    The right to travel is a part of the ‘liberty’ of which the citizen, including the registered sex offenders, cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. [b]If that “liberty” is to be regulated, it must be pursuant to the law-making functions of the Congress. . . . . [/b]Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values.

    In addition to the advanced notification to the destined country of the travel of a registered citizen, similar notices in the past have resulted in an individual being immediately deported without regard to the nature of the offense, when the offense occurred, or if the offense had been repeated. HR 515 would also allow the U.S. State Department to add “unique identifiers” to the passport of some registered citizens even if doing so requires revocation of an existing passport. There is no evidence that this nation has ever used a “unique identifier” on the passport of one of its citizens. And there is no justification to do so at this time!

    Does the United States want to repeat the mistake of Nazi Germany that added a “unique identifier” to the passports of its Jewish citizens? No, we do not!

    Please vote “No” to HR515 to protect for the travel liberty and freedom of ALL Americans!

    Thanks

  13. PK

    I know that Chris updated everyone on a different thread regarding:

    HR515 will be voted on this Tuesday January 26th.

    http://www.majorityleader.gov/floor/#weekly

    I would think now would be the perfect time to send out emails to as many Bill’s Co-Sponsor’s as you can.

    • David Kennerly

      Well, I would say all House members, not just co-sponsors.

    • ma.concerned.citizen

      I’ve emailed every possible co-sponsor and representative as I can. I noticed that the popvox website now has 716 opposing to just 105 supporting. I really hope all those emails and other correspondence gives them pause on voting this bill in.

      I guess there is nothing left to do now but cross our fingers. I hope I’m wrong, but I have a huge pit in my stomach now…

    • Drew

      I think we tried everything in our powers. Congress will get their way and silently pass this bill. There’s no powers advocating for us strong enough to oppose this. Does anyone know if there’s someone ready to challenge this as soon as it passes?

      • David Kennerly

        Yes, it will immediately be challenged with a lawsuit with a request for an injunction. We can thank Janice for that, too.

        It cannot be emphasized too strongly that we need all of the help we can get going forward, regardless of the success of IML since travel notifications are already, and will still be, issued without it.

        Contact Paul Rigney to get involved, please.

        rigneyp@registranttag.org

  14. 4sensiblepolicies

    I have contacted Mr. Paul Rigney and am offering my support both as a litigant and financially. My passport actually has been expired for some time, but I will be renewing it this week – if for no other reason than to give me standing as a litigant if this passes. Everyone with any means to get involved needs to do so. This goes to the core of our civil liberties. Standing by hoping someone else will fight for your rights is not an option if you hope to have any freedoms in the future. I am sickened by this and if this legislation is allowed to stand, does not bode well for this nation’s future.

  15. Paul

    My question is this: Just who in hell are these RSOs that get to travel overseas anyway? They sure as hell ain’t from the great Country of Texas! An RSO in Texas can’t even travel from one city to another without going through red tape tall as Mt. Everest. So if an RSO in Texas were to request permission to travel to another Country it would be a 99.99% certainty that he/she will be looking at a Texas Ranger investigation! So again, my question is: just who are these RSOs that get to travel internationaly? What state(s) are they from? Please tell me if you know because I just can’t figure why this type of law is needed when travel restrictions are one of the main punishments while being on a state’s registry.

    • lovewillprevail

      In response to Paul (Jan 2017)…

      In Texas, IF you are probation or parole you may very well have quite a bit of red tape to go through to travel as it is common by the judges to restrict travel outside the county without prior approval from the probation department. I have been told the same by people on parole.

      While on probation, I had to turn down several job interviews as my probation department would not let me go even 1 mile over the county line into another suburb even if there were no child safety zones. It was all about control. This was even admitted to me later by probation and my sex treatment provider. It did not matter to them if I stayed unemployed longer and my children suffered due to me not being able to pay child support. A requirement of my judge was for me to be employed and pay child support. So the probation department made sure I violated two conditions of supervision and made sure my children suffered. It was not bad enough I suffered, my children must suffer too. A common practice in Texas is for probation and sex treatment providers to put far more restrictions on you than the judge.

      But if you are not on probation or parole and are still registered, there is no legal requirement under Code of Criminal Procedures Chapter 62 to notify your local registering office if you travel within the US. Of course your registering office will lie to you and tell you the opposite. I have experienced that first hand. Of course one has to ensure he complies with all other states and SORNA regulations if traveling outside of Texas

      If I am understanding correctly, (confirm with an attorney and don’t rely on me) if registered citizens from Texas are traveling outside the country without notifying the local registering office, that may be ok under the IML because the IML does not apply to all types of sex crimes. But if the IML applies, then if one does not notify, then one risks a felony and up to ten years in federal prison.

      But, since the fed government is viewing every day airline information, even if not required to make a notice under the IML, the feds will still send green cards to the other country where the other country will or will not let you enter. Maybe the RSOs you are asking about are not required to notify under the IML and the countries still let them in after receiving a green card. Or maybe they were required to notify and did not, green card sent, country let them in. And maybe the fed have not yet come after them to arrest and charge them with a felony. Or maybe they gave notice , traveled and the country let them in even after receiving the green card. None of this has anything to do with Texas – it is all fed related.

      And of course per the feds, the IML does not stop you from traveling, you just have to give notice so they can give notice to the other country and the other country can decide to let you enter or send you back home.

      My suggestion is to read the IML to determine if it applies to you and if you have questions, contact an attorney. And my suggestion is to comply with all unconstitutional laws until overturned or you will be in prison. I value living under unconstitutional laws over living in prison in the short-term. At least under the unconstitutional laws I can do a few things which is better than doing no things.

      But traveling from city to city within Texas once off parole and probation is currently not an issue.

      But having said that, if one is gone 7 days, then the state under Chapter 62 could make an arguement you no longer live at your residence and you failed to notify your local registering office about your move in the required timeframe, and they can arrest you and charge you with felony. I was told of a person this happened to, just traveled from Texas to another state on vacation, told his neighbor to take care of his animals, get his mail, etc…and told the neighbor when he would be back from vacation. The sheriff had the person extridicted from the other state back to Texas and charged him with a felony.

      A civil rights attorney was able to get the charge dismissed. But this civil rights attorney suggested that if going on vacation, even though not required to make any notifications, it is best if one does make notification and also gives an expected return date. The attorney stated you could be arrested, pay for an attorney and have the charged dismissed, all costing you time or money or you could even though not required by law, give notice to avoid any hassle.

    • PK

      Who in the hell are these people?

      They’re people with families in other countries, who were convicted decades ago, for sometimes simple misdemeanors. Some of these poor “””” have even had their records expunged, and they’re not even required to register as a Sex Offender.

      Here is an example of a dangerous predator who was recently denied entry into Mexico.

      https://all4consolaws.org/2014/02/international-travel-mexico/#comment-167004

    • ml

      Well when I was under indictment, I was allowed to travel to MX. When I was on probation, I was allowed to travel to MX. I had to present a travel plan to my treatment provider and my PO who then had the judge sign off on it. I traveled to MX on business maybe 30 times until I was turned around at an airport inside MX. I have never touched anyone, had never been accused of touching anyone and was doing relatively well until the Freedom Nazis got involved with this legislation.

      • PK

        I traveled almost the same about 20 times back and forth to Mexico without any problems at all up until around January 2014. That’s when all these clandestine notifications started being sent by our Government to Mexico.

        Convicted of a Misdemeanor in 2001, that would mean that I traveled without any problems or issues, for 14 years starting after the day after my conviction.

        In my case, there was no travel plan or approval required in order to travel, and NO PO involved in my life.

        • DavidH

          here’s the thing– what if under federal law ( Wetterling, AWA) you should be deemed a tier I or II should you then still get a notification? IML and Angel Watch hasn’t thought this through I believe, and are negligently applied without distinction notification.

          I cant recall if in IML they refer to tier levels in particular or just the age of the “victim;” however irrespective of that one must ask should there be such a delineation– is a tier I or II really an emanate threat, as immigration describes in there notice??

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 *

.