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

Justice Department Announces Almost $18 Million In Awards To Support Sex Offender Registration, Assessment, Intervention

Today the Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs (OJP) awarded almost $18 million to implement and enhance sex offender programming throughout the United States.

“We have made tremendous strides over the last decade toward building a comprehensive sex offender registration and notification system,” said Director Luis C. deBaca, Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering and Tracking (SMART Office). “The new awards take our efforts to the next stage, giving our state, local and tribal partners evidence-based tools and technologies that will enhance their capacity to manage sex offenders and protect citizens.” Full Article

Press Release

Join the discussion

  1. Nicholas Maietta

    I built in less than 2 years time, a realty automation software suite that collects more data than this and in my opinion, has to be far more complicated than 50+ states collected datasets into one system. I can also say that it surely didn’t cost 18 million.

    Where’s all that money going?

    • Rick

      It goes into the hands of corrupt politicians who get to take away our rights and get paid to do it. The us government pays states to do do this, and yet they dont. What a lawless nation we live in.

    • j

      A good amount is going into burning copies of the bill of rights and the constitution, or otherwise making it inaccessible to those who need it most. The underlying theme is to continually punish registrants as the lies told thousands of times (by those who are sworn to uphold the constitution) become truth.

      I wish I had a job that paid a bonus for every lie that was told…

      • American Detained in America

        heck, I just wish I could get a job…I keep getting turned down when they find out I have to register

        • MS

          Assuming they find out you have to register when they get the background checks results back. Or do you have to disclose on your application because your conviction isn’t expunged? Registration make it nearly impossible to get a job…especially if one is listed on the ML website.

          I ran a background check on myself once and my expunged conviction didn’t show up on the background check but it did include my ML profile pic and offense. My conviction has now been expunged and I have been removed from the ML website (thanks to a 17b reduction). Need to run another background check on myself to see if the ML profile pic and offense no longer show up.

    • Timmr

      “SMART” and “design”? Who thinks up this stuff? There is nothing smart in erecting a public shaming system that tries to make the names of ex offenders even more publically available than they already are. They have the information available that shows that public registry and associated restraints only makes sexual crime more likely. Spend $1 million in a media campaign to educate the public about that, and they will have done a public service
      I would (in sarcasm) give them credit, though, having enough cleverness to deceive the public into throwing more assets into the public resource dump, and sticking their snouts in it to gorge on the public’s good will.

  2. Paul

    Thank you, but I don’t require any “management”. I’m a free person, not on parole or probation, who’s single, non-violent, non-contact, misdemeanor charge was expunged well over 6 years ago.

    You can take your offensive “management”, and shove it up your….

    • Will A

      Completely agree with you. These government criminals will not “manage” me. I will continue to beat them as I have done for 2 decades. I have ensured that their Registries are not just worthless, but much, much worse.

      F the NOT-SMART office and every single person who supports them. They are not my fellow U.S. citizens.

  3. Punished For Life

    “The SMART Office also dedicated $882,000 to support maintenance, operations and enhancements technology tools for sex offender administration, such as the National Sex Offender Public Website (which allows the public to search for registered sex offenders on a national scale), the Tribe and Territory Sex Offender Registry System, the Sex Offender Registry Tool and the SORNA Exchange Portal.”

    So we’ve done everything right for decades and we get relief from the requirement to register Stateside. Looks like the Feds. will somehow look, via Adam Walsh Act, at your original conviction rather than your potential for “recidivism” or your “danger to society”. So according to your State, you may have been granted relief and the Fed could potentially still pull you onto a national public accessible list. And we know that they will make all of this retroactive. Seems they always do!

    Many individuals have spent thousands to attempt to be removed from this unconstitutional abuse of the “scheme” that has destroyed so many families and individuals. And now the Feds just keep pumping tax dollars into this total mess. Somehow, SCOTUS needs to put an end to this abuse and punishment once and for all.


    • DavidH

      I have become so anti federal government since I’ve witnessed they’re the lone driver behind all this madness! Maybe the militia groups have it right!

  4. David

    So, this money will be “giving our state, local and tribal partners evidence-based tools and technologies …..” Stop there. Evidence-based legislation would require politicians to take into account the actual documented very low S.O. recidivism rates and would force them to act appropriately to restructure and limit Registries, SORNA, AWA, and IML. That is what EVIDENCE-BASED LEGISLATION would do!!! And did others also note that NO MONEY is being directed toward developing an verifiable, scientific “risk assessment tool”?? But there’s no money for that because they don’t want their lies coming to light.

    • DavidH

      nah in recognition that they are getting close to having to prove their theory and to have more than a static 99 to hide behind what they are doing is to try to create the data that these psycho sociopaths can use to attempt to justify their existence

  5. Joe

    EVIDENCE based? Whuh?

  6. DavidH

    just keep saying we need to get the federal government out of this business , and leave things to the states: 10th amendment!

    • David

      I recommend that we each write to our government representatives and to Director Luis C. deBaca, Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering and Tracking (SMART Office)Department of Justice’s Office of Justice Programs (OJP), and ask why some if these funds are not going directed to: 1. the development of proven, effective prevention programs and prevention counseling, and 2. the development of a researched and scientifically-proven risk assessment tool to replace the current Static-99 faux-science tool that’s too reminiscent of the Salem witch hunt era. Seriously folks, I encourage you to start “kicking up a fuss”!! Point out their own government-documented low recidivism rates! Tell them to stop wasting taxpayers’ money to promote lies and persecution.

  7. Renny

    That reads like a declaration of war to me.

    So be it.

  8. New Person

    Is it possible to send the CASOMB results for the past four years to all the other states as well as the DOJ with a receipt. Each of the past four years, the result has dropped, with the last two years dropping below 1%.

    Oddly enough, this is the same CASOMB that recommends a tiered system that only less than 1% re-offend for a sex crime?

    The stigma far outweighs the actual results – as proven by the CASOMB recommending a tiered system.

  9. luis

    “The new awards take our efforts to the next stage, giving our state, local and tribal partners evidence-based tools and technologies that will enhance their capacity to manage sex offenders and protect citizens.”

    I guess we can look forward to an upgrade from the STATIC-99 scam… to the STATIC-100 super scam.

  10. Dr

    This is the biggest waste of money I have seen in quite a while . Why don’t they take this money and do the right thing and educate the public about prevention . Or they can take this money and put it into the mental health program . But we all know the governments not too smart

  11. Lillian

    So this Luis deBaca, it seems, graduated from the University of Michigan Law School. The same law school whose legal clinic program has helped the ACLU in Michigan strike down its registry as punishment in the 6th Circuit. Such a shame that such a fine law school has produced a disingenuous “law enforcement” official whose aim is to help a not-so-“SMART” program in oppressing the rights of people who have long paid their sentence to society. I once had great respect for police and law enforcement. But I now see the police and law enforcement as corrupt liars, with interests in self-recognition (i.e. over-inflated egos) and job security, who should not be trusted or even respected. They have a job to protect us. But it should not be at the cost of spreading dishonest propaganda (or slots for government hack “fellowship” or “scholarship” slots).

    • joseph

      The two “fellowship” positions will be dedicated to finding “scientific” evidence that rationalizes a sex offender registry. You can bet on that.

      As of now, there is no scientific evidence supporting efficacy of any type of sex offender registry. But as these government hacks begin to grow in number, I’m sure with some statistical manipulation, they’ll be able to not only rationalize the efficacy of sex offender registries, but also somehow over-inflate the recidivism of those given the label of “sex offender” (in much the same way I fear the Static 99 over-inflates recidivism).

      It really is sad how disingenuous the system is.

  12. j

    They ought to earmark $1m for educating teachers and administrators about the CDCR’s study. Though this law has mostly to do with sensationalism and an insurance package for legislators, the $1m spent may help spread the inconvenient truth that non-registrants are the persons most likely to commit a new offense.

    That being said, don’t continue to hold your breath waiting for lawmakers to dispel the truth.

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 *