General Comments June 2016

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of June 2016. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil.

Related posts

262 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I was wondering if anyone knows of any job sites that are similar to Craigslist, but would have a more professional bent? The reason I am asking is that I’ve tried writing up a short description under the resumes section, and have only gotten responses from scammers.

Basically I wrote up something describing my education and experience, and then go on to state something to the tune of “over 10 years ago I made a mistake..and so on” I keep it very high level, not giving details.

So I was wondering if there was something similar that I could use to put the same thing in front a more professional audience. It seems all the major job search links..ie Monster, SimplyHired, etc do not allow anything like that. I thought trying to be upfront right off the bat would be the honorable thing, but what do I know. (if it matters, I am off the hit list, I would just have to worry about the BG check, which will still be a monster, which is why I thought being upfront right away would help.)

Thanks…

This article is a year old, but very informative:

Static-99: A bumpy developmental path

http://forensicpsychologist.blogspot.com/2015/04/static-99-yet-more-bumps-on-rocky.html

I’m reposting this as I think it’s an additional avenue to have our voices heard. This is not to replace letter writing or phone calls to your representatives, it’s just an additional way to voice your opinion. When politicians receive these responses they get an overall percentage of people’s opinions and a breakdown of votes by districts along with the individual messages submitted by those in that representative’s district. So far only two of us have voted their opinion on these 2 upcoming bills. If you are not registered with POPVOX, please do so. Every California and Federal Bill can be voted on here and most importantly please leave a personal message. Personal messages (short or long) have the most impact. All messages sent are delivered to the politician that belongs in your district. POPVOX will display your vote and message for all to read, however your personal identity information is not shown publicly, it is only given to the politicians that received your message as that is required for all online messages sent to politicians. I know that the messages have been received as I have received many email responses from Congress. POPVOX has been very active on the federal level, but it is very new to California, so there is not much activity with people submitting their votes and messages. California is one of the first two states that they have expanded their service to. Also remember that you must be a resident of California to vote on a California Bill. Lets make sure we have an overwhelming NO vote to both of these Bills.

SB 448: Sex offenders: Internet identifiers.

https://www.popvox.com/states/ca/bills/20152016/SB448

AB 2569: Registered sex offenders exclutions.

https://www.popvox.com/states/ca/bills/20152016/AB2569

Please be sure to carefully vote to OPPOSE both bills, as people have mistakenly voted the wrong way in the past. (Like voting yes but then writing a message opposing a bill). For those of you that sit by the sidelines and don’t normally let your voice be heard, this is the easiest way to help us help you!

Am I reading this LA Times story right? Is there a 290 registration exemption for GOP officials who pleaded out to a felony charge of distributing pornography to a minor when the DA reduced it to a misdemaener? Nowhere in this article is lifetime sex offender registration mentioned as part of this distinguished gentleman’s (former head of the LA County Republican Party) punishment.

He was ordered to attend a 52 week “Sex Offender” counseling course, put on probation for three years, ordered to stay away from minors, and has to perform community service. But no mention of 290 registration.

Methinks there is a foul odor emanating from this courtroom. I can’t tell if it’s coming from the judge or the DA. I know it may be hard to believe, but I think they might be in cahoots. My faith in the American justice system is just utterly shattered. Woe is me!

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-text-charges-gop-plea-agreement-20160617-snap-story.html

For Risk Assessments, what does ‘convictions’ mean? For example, if you were convicted of a felony and 2 misdemeanors at one time and then nothing subsequently, would that be 1 conviction or 3?
Thanks

I know a few states like Ohio and Maryland have found that registration is in fact punishment and thus cannot be enforced retroactively. Now that that precedent has been set, does anyone know if there are any cases in the works claiming that registration is cruel and unusual punishment? It is my assumption that that would be the next logical step in the process for the repeal of sex offender registration laws.

This Sotomayor decision seems very encouraging, although not sex offender related, it’s possible she will swing our way.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/sotomayor-supreme-court-dissent-utah-strieff/index.html

Well I am on the national call with RSOL and from Janice’s comments, it looks like we are going to be stuck with this law. Furthermore, it appears in the Federal system that there seems to be little in the way of checks and balances on a prejudiced Federal judge. This is very depressing.

I apologize for harping. As I ponder Janice’s portion of the call, I feel gut punched. Any half educated person who read Janice’s motion as opposed to the government’s briefs, would be struck with how clearly that it should be an easy decision. There is absolutely no lady of justice with any scales. In this case she is just a black robed governmental employee protecting her paycheck. In her case it is as if a Federal judge should not use any common sense. To rule that one of the plaintiffs should suffer an indignity, for the case to be ripe, perhaps death in the case of the plaintiff with Iranian ties, illustrates that common sense and a sense of fairness is not required to sit on the Federal bench.
Maybe for the younger citizens there will be a silver lining, but for me the sands are almost finished slipping through the hour glass. Now when I am in public and the star spangled banner plays, I want to throw up.

Interesting article on a recent study regarding crimes committed by police officers. One notable quote: “The most common crimes were simple assault, drunken driving and aggravated assault, and significant numbers of sex crimes were also found.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/06/22/study-finds-1100-police-officers-per-year-or-3-per-day-are-arrested-nationwide/?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories-2_coparrests-740a-stream%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

well I did my price club this morning , it sucked of course , I am zoned for the county , and even tho this is kern county , it beets going to PD because there rude and go out of there way to make you feel like crap , but the county are not that way , thay don’t like shake your hand and say they are glad to see you or anything like that lol, but they don’t act like your a leper , I guess they know you already feel sad , mad,and everything else all at the same time . I feel this days before and days after, well most of you know that. I just want to just go jump on just about any motorcycle and point the front wheel north and roll for a few days

Question for those that have been in this hell longer than I have:

Since in the 2003 Smith VS Doe the SCOTUS justices made reference to how Sex Offender Registration may violate Substantive Due Process and should be challenged on that instead of just challenging Ex-Post Facto like it was, then why in 13 years has no case come close to doing just that? Or did it, and I missed it?

Looking at the description and chart here:

http://nationalparalegal.edu/conLawCrimProc_Public/DueProcess/SubstantiveFundamentalRights.asp

It clearly violates Substantive Due Process since it inhibits numerous rights and the state’s goals could be achieved by means that do not affect the people that it does that don’t deserve it. The states should also have to prove that there was a “stranger danger” problem existing that was bad enough to remove almost a million people’s rights.

Can someone help me understand? Are all 800,000+ of us to poor to challenge it? I know I am too poor, and I’ll be off (unless it changes again) before a challenge would make it high enough in the system.

As my husband nears the end of his probation (just seven weeks to go), a new fear has arisen: the possibility of compliance checks. After surviving the humiliation of two searches during probation and monthly home visits from P.O.s who wear badges around their necks, carry giant walkie-talkies in their hands, and sometimes sport t-shirts that say “L.A. County Probation: Relax,” I cannot fathom the horror of finally settling into a semi-normal life, only to have that life disrupted by police officers coming to our apartment door just to verify that my husband does, in fact, live here. Does anyone have any experience with post-probation/parole compliance checks in Long Beach? Currently, after my husband has registered and/or updated his address, he gets a call from LBPD to verify his info. This is not a problem for us. He answers the officer’s questions, and we quickly move on. If I knew that that would the extent of the checks, I could maybe, just maybe, relax. Any information that anyone from Long Beach has would be much appreciated.

Someone in LA (Louisiana) was just arrested for having a social media account in violation of the law – It is illegal to even have an account there. If this is not an unconstitutional violation of the first amendment I do not know what it. It creates a chilling effect on free speech.

So if I go vacation in Louisiana I need to delete my face book account first? Then when I get back its ok?

I have a solid question… so I was convicted of sleeping with a 15 year old who lied about her age when I was 21. At that time there was a law stating age of victim and the fact she lied was not a defense. Now there’s a law that says age of victim is a defense so I was not allowed to use it. I took a plea and there is no way I am going to go to court again because I would probably get screwed with more time. Do you think it’s a due process violation that they can retroactively force me to register again because of this. I could have pleaded to a lesser crime had I been able to use it as a defense. What’s your thoughts?

If anyone hasn’t read this yet, including Janice, than it is a MUST READ:

http://www.hastingslawjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/Carpenter-Beverlin-63.4.pdf

This is a great summary of the history of how we got stuck with registration laws, and ends with the ways the tide can change if a new challenge can make it to SCOTUS. I’ve read hundreds of articles on the subject, and this is the best I’ve seen.

Is there a place to permanently put this on this web site? It is a crucial legal analysis that would benefit registrants as well as legal professionals.

WANT TO GET JANICE’S ACTION ALERTS EMAILS? Send us an email to this address (sorry, I have to spell this out due to spam bots):
carsolinfo at gmail dot com

You can ask us to put you on the Action Alert list.

You can also ask us to forward Janice’s latest Action Alert to you.

You won’t be spammed because we don’t give out our email list and we only send a few emails per month at most.

Not sure if there’s a dedicated thread for this or not, so figured I’d post here. Last weekend, I went in for my annual registration update. (On Father’s Day) I’ve been a registrant since 1998. Since my first registration, up until last years annual, I’ve always registered at the Anaheim Police Department front counter. This year, however, they’ve apparently changed things. When I called to make my appointment, I was told that I’d be reporting to the jail on the backside of the station. I wasn’t quite sure what to expect, so I was a bit cautious going into it. I reported early, as I always do…about 15 minutes beforehand. I also dress for this occasion, figuring I might be given a slight bit more respect for looking like the successful businessman that I am. Of all the years I’ve registered, I’m generally treated with nothing but respect and have never been made to feel like I’m a lower classed citizen. However, this time was different. I was told to take a seat, upon reporting and telling them what I was there for. Once they were ready for me, I was called upon by an officer shouting, “Hey you! Come over here.” He asked me for my ID and told me to go sit back down. Approximately 45 minutes later (Yes, it took that long, as my wife and I were sitting there wondering why it was taking so long) the officer finally called me back up to the glass again. “Hey, come here again.” I proceeded up to the glass window and was asked to meet him at the first door to the right of the counter. I was then buzzed into this little visiting room and the heavy, metal door shut behind me. This visiting room was a solid brick room with a metal seat and a phone hanging on the wall and a glass window that separated the officer and me. At this point, I wondered, what the heck is this? I was literally sitting in one of the visitation rooms that people visit the prisoners in. The officer then proceeded to go over the entire process with me, asking me every question while he typed everything into a laptop. He did not communicate with me via the telephone, but instead slightly yelling to me through the window so that I could hear him. Constantly having to ask me to repeat my answers. Once we were done, he asked me to go back and sit out in the lobby again. I was buzzed out, as you can’t just open the door to get out without it being released. (False imprisonment?) I returned back to the brick seating area in the lobby. (Very different from the Police front lobby with there nice looking wooden benches. These were full brick, as though it was a jail cell) After another 20 minutes or so of waiting, I was again called by the officer, “Hey you, go over to that door, pointing at the door on the left of the counter.” So, I proceeded to the door and was buzzed in. This time, leading to the jail area. Upon entering the door, he immediately gave me directions to put my hands behind my back, walk close against the wall, and go down the hall an turn to the right. Once I got to that point, he then commanded me to stop and place my hands against the wall, where he promptly patted me down. (Never in my previous 18 years of registering have I ever been asked to keep my hands behind my back or been patted down.) Mind you, I pled to a misdemeanor 647.6, never did a day of jail time, and have no other convictions. Once he was done searching me, he then had me proceed to a little room, while again commanding me to keep my hands behind my back at all times. Once in the room, this was where he proceeded to finger print me and take my photos. The entire time, he made sure my hand that he wasn’t printing, was placed behind my back. I decided to ask him when they started doing this process in the jail area and he replied, “about 2 months.” I then asked, “No intended disrespect, but why do I get treated as a prisoner when I’ve never had this treatment before when registering at the front desk?” He responded with, “this is how we do it back here. Anyone who comes back here is treated this way.” That was the extent of our conversation, as I just shut my mouth and waiting for it to end. I must say, as humiliating as annual registration is, I’ve always been treated with some form of respect up until now. Not only do we have to endure this terrible event at our birthdays, but now have to also be treated as though we’re in custody…at least if you’re registering at the Anaheim Police Department. It’s a shame they have decided to make this processing change, because the cadets always did a decent job of making you feel, at least somewhat human during this dreadful process.

Unfortunately my NY Attorney has just informed me that we would be unable to move forward with a federal action against the NY Registry with the other Plaintiff, who would have been my co-plaintiff.

He already went through the NY State Appeals Court regarding his issue in the fact that NY is forcing him to remain on their Registry despite the fact that he no longer lives, works, or pays taxes in New York. Similarly, I haven’t lived or worked in New York for over 16 years, and yet despite the fact that I’m not even required to register in DC, New York continues to force me to comply with their registration scheme.

Under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, lower federal courts do not have subject matter jurisdiction to review state court judgments. Rather, the only federal court that can review state court judgments is the United States Supreme Court.

Without another plaintiff, I would not be down with bringing a federal case against the NY Registry by myself.

So the States must receive federal funds based on the number of people on their registries. Or perhaps by having so many registrants, L.E. can make the argument that the legislatures must give them more and more money so they can keep track of oh so many registrants.
At the same time, do state’s really won’t bragging rights for who has the greatest number of registered sex offenders??

When reading this article:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-domestic-abusers-can-be-banned-from-owning-firearms/ar-AAhGgKw?li=BBnbcA1

Then seeing a Supreme Court Justice Thomas ask “Can you give me another area where a misdemeanor violation suspends a constitutional right?”

I bet the person he asked didn’t bother to point out “ummm…thousands of sex offenders convicted or even deferred on misdemeanor sex offences maybe?”

If I’ve read this article correctly, Hawaii is about to start adding gun owners to the FBI criminal database. Stuff like this just makes me smile…

https://www.yahoo.com/news/hawaii-becomes-first-state-put-145141639.html

All the comments screaming about how this can’t be constitutional. About how it will be challenged in court. About how it could never stand. All the people who didn’t so much as blink while registration precedents were affirmed all the way to the supreme court as being merely regulatory and civil.

Welcome to Price Club Hawaii gun owners, it only gets more fun from here.

Hope you enjoy the ride.

Janice Bellucci is enjoying some grilling time in the courtroom today. She was scorching defendent Charles Roderick, shortly after Roderick’s former attorney testified that Roderick is a sociopath. This is really good news!