Tiered Registry #1 Recommendation of CA Sex Offender Management Board

The California Sex Offender Management (CA SOMB) published today its Year End Report for 2015. The #1 recommendation in that report is creation of a tiered registry. The other recommendations are to limit the use of residency restrictions, continue to fund sex offender risk assessments, bridge gaps in what is known about registrants, encourage collaboration between victim advocates and sex offender management professionals and continue use of polygraphs.

“We are encouraged to see that CA SOMB continues to support a tiered registry,” stated CA RSOL president Janice Bellucci. “Support from the state legislature, however, will be required to make such a registry a reality.”

According to the Year End Report, CA SOMB recommends a three-tiered registry that would allow some registered citizens to be automatically removed from the registry after 10 or 20 years provided that they have not re-offended. Those who would be removed after 10 years include those convicted of a low level offense and are assessed to be a low risk to re-offend. Those who would be removed after 20 years include those assessed to have a moderate risk to re-offend. Individuals who have committee specified crimes, multiple crimes or assessed to be at a high risk to re-offend would continue to register for a lifetime.

“Tiering would achieve considerable fiscal savings by discontinuing the monitoring of those thousands of registrants who pose a negligible threat to community safety after 10 or 20 years,” according to the CA SOMB report (page 3). The report also notes that California is 1 of only 4 states in the nation that requires lifetime registration for all sex offenders.

According to the Year End Report, there were 74,018 registrants in the community in December 2015. In addition, there were 22,417 in custody and an additional 8,208 on community supervision.

Year End Report – 2015

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

140 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

thank u supporters of RSOL .. its 1 thing to hv to register n a totally other when innocent of said allegation..
btw, as I text this according to my research of 15 yrs and in my court record Im still waitng to be sentenced after 24 + yrs.. strange such legal perversion should prevail .. also Ive been married 2 x’s n am now raising 6 kids n divorced ( my own blood) but its odd to be a dad, totally free of parole 18 yrs and still in county jail.. thats where my county record stops.. so much for justice..btw the county reported that a new crime was committed in 1994, strange, I was in atascero then for a 2 wk eval that lasted 14 months.. according to a letter from atascero they only do evals for 2 wks.. but then they sent a letter to county jail saying,’ come get him or we wil let him go,’ unquote.. theres much to be ‘over-hauled’ including REAL JUSTICE..
ty n hv a gd day..

In conclusion, the bottom line is this. I fought the law and the law won! We can complain all we want, but the bottom line is that a tiered system spells freedom for thousands of individuals who have so long ago paid their debt to society! Don’t forget their families as well. So, instituting a tiered system that would allow you to fall off the registry after 10-20 years is GREAT News! Amazing. You can complain ect, but facts are facts.

I do not at all agree with this tiered proposal. I am also considered a “high risk offender” according to the Static 99R; this is something I have always disagreed with. It was a first time offense, no contact, non violent, from 2008. I have lived a clean life since (I was 21 then)! In fact, I’m so “high risk,” I’m not even listed on Megan’s Law website. Yet the Static 99R rates me a 6 score, subject to lifetime registration under this ridiculous tiered regisry. The Static 99R is totally inaccurate/unfair!

What IS the purpose of the Registry? Is it so victims cam peruse this database in search of a possible suspect? 74,000 profiles would make this task daunting. Or, is it’s existence merely to punish sex offenders for life?

No one has mentioned the data behind the Static-99/R (particularly it’s sample offenders) has never been publicly released; this violates section 8.14 of the American Psychological Association’s Code of Ethics. The Static-99 con men “developers” — Harris, Phenix, Hanson, and Thornton — wrongly claim the Static-99’s applicability to non-violent crimes. The test is like a comparison of apples to oranges. Read “Alice in actuarial-land: through the looking glass self of changing Static-99 norms,” as it’s written by qualified professionals (unlike the ‘developers’ of the Static-99). Personally, I am troubled CA SOMB would create a tiered proposal based on the wholly inaccurate Static-99R. It makes me question CA SOMB’s true motive — as tiered proposal is not based on the very “evidence-based” data CA SOMB ostensibly relies on. What is lifetime registration’s purpose when even alleged “high-risk” offenders do not recidivate after 17 years? Plus: ~ 95 percent of sex crime are committed by first-time offenders.

Steve (no “reply” function under commen to Mike A.): You clearly have not read Question Number 7 to the Static 99R Coding Form. If you had actually taken the time to read the Coding Form, you would note in no uncertain terms the Static 99R perversely gives ONE point for non-contact offenses, whereas contact offenses earn ZERO points. This is one of the countless logical flaws to the Static 99R hocus-pocus. If Mike A. was released between 18 to 34.9 (+1), never lived with a lover for at least two years (+1), had unrelated/stranger/male victim (+3), and had a non-contact offense (even non-violent, first-time) (+1)… then Mike A. easily earns a 6 under the illogical Static 99R. Any credible statistician would agree the Static 99R is a phony sham — as it flaunts the statistical tenet: “Correlation does not imply causation.” It is clear Harris, Phenix, Karl Hanson, and Thornton are NOT statisticians by trade. Because had the developers even taken a basic statistics class, they would have learned the above tenet.

Wow this Static 99R is a big sham. What exactly is defined as high risk? If one is an exhibitionist, or other non-violent offender, and flagged “high risk” … then certainly that is not the same as, say, a violent sex offender (not to say he didn’t learn from a mistake) who is flagged high risk. The Static test treats both the non-violent and violent alike, as the crimes are lumped in a bogus statistical model tantamount to junk science. I think this is the biggest flaw to the Static 99R: it doesn’t differentiate between “prediction” of severity of sex crime(s). The Static 99R treats all sex crimes and offenders alike, when the reality is each case is very different.

The tiered registry is a false prophet because it incorporates the Static-99R fraud. Ten so-called “Risk Factors” do not define human behavior. And the Static-99R certainly is unable to predict the future. The Static-99 tests are, themselves, false prophets.

I don’t understand why Janice or the ACLU or any lawyer hasn’t filed a class action lawsuit challenging the application of the static 99R and also the fact that the DOJ do not have documentation of a static 99R score of many RSOs and also not to also bring out the the fact that probably many like myself were given the static 99R prior to being paroled on a non violent or serious offense and has not committed a violent or serious offense prior to that for 10 years and also that an RSO can not get section 8 should be challenged in a Court of Law because it violates our constitutional rights by falsely labeling us and punishing us and our children and loved ones. I’d appreciate all comments and Ms Janice comments also. Thank You

By the way, if it’s that they need money to investigate my claims further and to file a class action lawsuit then we should all chip in whatever we can afford to make it possible because all of us have good valid constitutional issues that violate our constitutional rights as a whole that deprives us of our liberty and puts our lives and the lives of our loved ones in danger ! Remember we have paid for what we have done and we’re allowed to be released back into society and we’re not committed as sexual violent predators for treatment Therefore we should at most be labeled as ex sex offenders and not “Sex Offenders” and continue to be punished in more ways than one to the point banishing us from society completely !

VOTE CLINTON…3 more LIBERAL judges appointed to Supreme Court. Increase odds for a Tiered Registry!!!!!

stack it any way you wish , when that may help many , it still chucks other so called violent/dangers offenders under the bus , so let me get this right , if a person goes out and murders someone , or drives there car drunk and kills a whole family , they just go do there time / probation / what ever , and that’s it ? yet someone that took a deal back in the say 79 or 80 , and do 2 years on class c felony , and after doing there time they see that the cops will never leave them alone , they move back to CA (home) only to end up yet again cot up in some sh!t that has nothing to do with a sex crime , and your honest when they ask if you have ever got any felony’s and tell them about the class c, just under 5 years before , now the crime your looking at a sex crime , now its Intent ! rather than a trespass or at most b&e , end up having to take new deal , 9 years , , hell no I am not going to chuck anyone under the bus , because in know way was eather crime the same , at no time was there ever a fare trail , it was never safe in eather jail , and no lawer that gave crap about facts , everyone , is just that 1 , most people don’t know anything about the courts Witch Hunt back in the 8os , if someone has been out of prison for over 20 30 years did there time there is no reason to supect thay will commit the same crime , that will just allow the courts to witch hunt , after being clean that long , I think the courts need to be looked at , because its the courts that need to be looked at!! , and the jails!! that make it so hard for you to fight your case ! no I am not going to jump under a bus ! hell why not just pass laws to just kill us ? or make it fun and make it open hunting , or maybe sell sex offender hunting perment ? for the intertainment of the stalker spaz out there , you know the ones that have real bones to hide , the RSO laws are unjust , and the new ones to come will be worse,

If I had the resources, I would totally sue the California Department of Justice, along with the Canadian Static 99 developers (Karl Hanson, Thornton, etc.) for peddling the Static 99R fraud. The Static 99R makes many false and misleading misrepresentations and has incorrectly labeled many lives as “high risk.” Only in the sex offender “treatment” industry is hocus pocus, Minority Report style, psuedo-science endorsed by frauds in our government. There is an intense flavor of dishonesty and corruption in the people that supposedly represent us in government.

I have to agree with New Person as I see the registry as illegal and added punishment that should not exist in the first place. By changing the terms of the registry, we still leave it intact, and it will still impact so many registrants and their families and children. We need to keep fighting to get this nonsense abolished once and for all.

Hmmm i scored a 2 on the static 99r. My conviction is 261.5c and 251.5d for one case. Id be at 20years on there tier if i read correctly? Anyone know please? Thanks

Tiered registry is 100% phony baloney. I may not be the most educated man in the world but when CDCR calls me high risk because of the Static 99 and I KNOW IT WAS A MISTAKE NOT TO BE REPEATED, then why have me register for life under this so called tiered registry? With all the caveats behind tiered registry, seems like it is designed to help only a few while throwing everyone else under the bus.

I read the CASOMB report and am disgusted at its propaganda. The California Containment Model is a complete scam. What’s more troubling is its assumption that the Static 99 score and tests are accurate, and that the polygraph is also a valid form of science. Such claims cannot be further from the truth — as even an amateur scientist, with an elementary grasp of science’s very basic concepts — can determine for themselves that there is absolutely nothing scientific (or even accurate) with the Static 99 tests or its illegitimate relative, the lie detector. If the state can outright lie for something like this, what else are our politicians and imposter psychologists (like tom tobin) being dishonest about?

I concur that the Static 99 and Static 99R tests are complete frauds. A study needs to come out and discredit the Static tests!

We all know that the major majority of offenders(95%) are not a danger and only 5% are so lifetime registration is not what is needed the. Tier system is what is best for california. The majority of everyone wins and how often that happen?

I will be talking to Judge Steven Manley at the Veteran Standdown nextweek.. It would help if you also contact him and advise him of all the true facts as well. He is a Superior Court Judge in Santa Clara County Ca.
Have a good day
Neil Fisher

I live in a state with a tiered SOR…..Don’t do it. When I was initially classified by the Department of Corrections before my release from prison I was set at level 2 but the country Sheriff arborterilly raised my level to level 3. Why? Because I released to a county of non conviction and didn’t have any family in the area. I’ve been at this high risk level placement for 13 years without any issues. Ten of those years I was on active supervision with only 3 violations in those 10 years and each one self disclosed to my probation officer. While incarcerated I had 0 infractions. My sex offences, child molestation (step-daughter) communicating with minor for immoral purposes (her friend). The problem with a level is getting your level lowered. Nobody wants to sign off on lowering a RSO. If there is a method of reclassification in place that is automatic so nobody has to sign of on it then great. If it was like car insurance rates being lowered automatically for driving good, that would be great but if it requires someone to sign a piece of paper recommending your level to be lowered…. good luck!

I think many will regret a tiered registry that uses the Static 99R to determine if one should be subject to lifetime registration. There is more proposed law and policy that incorporates the Static 99R and it is personally troubling because I know the thing is not at all accurate in the prediction of the future. It will be right sometimes, but wrong most of the time when it labels someone high risk. Hope the Static tests are aggressively challenged and discredited in the future. There are many charlatans — who proclaim to experts — that support the Static-99R because they claim “it’s the best tool we have.” I won’t drink the Kool Aid.

I hate to use the STATIC-99R scam; but if so called “high risk sex offenders” do not recidivate after an offense-free period of 17 years, then what is the point of having a lifetime or even 20 year registration term under this “tiered” registry? Logically, the maximum term should be 17 years. Why would CASOMB see it necessary to add 20 year and lifetime tiers? CASOMB seems to be making very disingenuous proposals when their own “science” does not even substantiate such proposals.

Too many details, exceptions and caveats under this “fictitious tiered registry.” As a business owner who has managed to build a profitable business with three full-time employees (despite my lifetime obligation), I’ve long learned that convolution complicates and rarely leads to a goal. This tiered registry is much too convoluted. Many of us will be thrown under the bus, even when offense-free since 1988.

Sorry, I can’t agree with this fictitious tiered registry.

consists of the book itself