The California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) released new statistics regarding registrants during its regularly scheduled monthly meeting on October 20. In addition, the board discussed a tiered registry bill expected to be introduced in the state legislature in early 2017.
The total number of registrants is 104,369 according to CASOMB. Of that total, there are 16,294 in violation (about 16 percent) of registration laws. The total number of registrants who register as transients is 6,444 and of that total there are 1,575 (about 24 percent) in violation of registration laws. The total number of registrants on parole who are required to wear GPS units is 5,769 and of that total there are 5,505 registrants in counseling.
CASOMB stated it will sponsor a tiered registry bill in 2017 and the language of that bill is “set in stone”, according to Chairman Nancy O’Malley (also the District Attorney of Alameda County). The bill, if passed, would create three tiers that will allow some, but not all, registrants to terminate their registration requirements in either 10 or 20 years depending upon several factors.
The tiered registry bill would also provide for the “automatic” termination of registration requirements for registrants convicted before 1987 provided that they have not been convicted of a subsequent sex offense. CASOMB estimates that this provision would apply to about 10,500 registrants.
Individuals convicted in 1987 or later may or may not be eligible for termination of their registration requirements. For those determined eligible, they will be required to submit a “petition for removal” to the state court in the county in which they reside.
The first step in the legislative process leading to a tiered registry is an informational hearing expected to be held in December 2016. During that hearing, a video produced by CASOMB will be shown to state legislators.
Despite discussion of a tiered registry bill during the meeting, CASOMB refused to provide copies of that bill to the public.
Pre 1987….Yeah! Maybe I won’t have to die to get off the registry if I can make it till then. Sorry to sound so selfish but I mostly want it for my young child who may be an innocent victim of the online shaming.
Those noncompliance rates seem like awfully inflated figures. As far as this “tiered” registration bill, something doesn’t seem right. Why would CASOMB “refuse” to release a copy of its proposal that is “set in stone?” CASOMB is a public agency that should be open to public transparency. Just exactly what is CASOMB hiding? I thought CASOMB was supposed to be our friend. Regardless, I remain opposed to any “tiered” registration scheme.
Where can I find a report or meeting minutes containing CASOMB’s new statistics?
The California sex offender management board, lol. You mean the California slavery and misinformation association. Wow, you have a legal group of slave owners and bosses? Your state is a shining example of corruption, first class discrimination. Hope the droughts and earthquakes don’t drive you away, stay there and reap what you sow. Wow.
RE: Post 1987 RCs.
A petition for removal for those who are eligible is required? Even for those who would be tier 1? So that means we don’t automatically fall off? And that petition can potentially still be denied?
Looks like I’ll still be filing a CoR in 2020 for removal. I don’t trust CASOMB’s recommendation especially since they refuse to publicly release copies of the bill.
As with everything, the devil is in the details. Absent more of those, this is what I am reading…
(a) registrants can petition for removal after either a 10 or 20 year period, depending on factors to be announced later.
(b) for those not eligible for (a) there would be automatic registration termination IF not convicted of a subsequent sex offense in the past 30 years (2017-1987=30). They must be referring to a running 30 year period as it makes no sense to automatically terminate someone convicted in December 1986 but not someone convicted in January 1987.
While the above mentioned factors remain to be seen (offense or risk or something else based), I read this that EVERYONE who has not re-offended in at least 30 years will be automatically removed from the registration requirement. CERTAIN registrants have the POSSIBILITY of getting off after 10 or 20 years, but 30 years is the max for non-recidivists.
Which leaves repeat offenders with a life-time requirement.
Am I reading this incorrectly or too optimistically? The CASOMB refusing to share the details is troubling, but it may be a simple timing issue.
Let’s face it – absent a complete overhaul of the system and an overturn of Doe v Smith the registry is not going away. While registration period is unbecoming of a civilized society and registration for a small subset is definitely unconstitutional, this is a very big step in the right direction. That is not to say that the invalidation of Doe v Smith should not remain the main goal of this organization, long-term.
I am against the registry, but I didn’t used to be. Over the last few years, it has really caused me some serious headaches, undue stress and serious hardships. Since those troubles, I’ve come to accept many peoples’ believe that the registry must come down. The very premise of the registry was well intentioned when it was first implemented, but it has been allowed and used as a tool of continuous and ever increasing punishment system. It is relentless in it’s nature. Thus, my stance that if someone is “dangerous”, they shouldn’t even be out. Clearly, the laws give X amount of time and give options for probation, et cetera. Once a person has completed that, they should not be forced onto a public shame list.
My conviction was nearly 17 years ago. I have far surpassed the time required to statistically be categorized as no more dangerous than the average citizen who is not on the registry. So why 1987? I was 7 years old then. This doesn’t make sense. I’m afraid that I won’t be able to get off the registry even after petitioning since at the time of my sentencing, the registry was considered “lifetime” and I had to acknowledge this fact before the Judge would accept a plea deal. Could they use that to prevent me from successfully petitioning the courts? That’s assuming I would even be allowed to petition the courts.
I’m glad that some people would get off the registry, but it’s just too late. There are people like Chuck Rodrick that cloned the registry for their own sick sadistic purposes. The information is now online forever, until it is scrubbed, if that is even possible. The damage has been done. There is no turning back.
Why not include Tier 1 as not being published on the Megan’s Law website and go back to how things were before internet based public disclosure/public shaming?
If I am statistically less likely to commit a sex crime in the future than someone who’s never been on the registry, then why are those not on the registry being forced to register? After all, we have to protect the children.
The only thing I like about a Tiered Registry is that it is the only “progress” we’ll see to abolishing the registry any time real soon. I worry though that someone getting off the registry would go out and commit a horrid sex crime only to have it revealed he/she was taken off the registry. There will always be 1 bad apple that spoils everything. When that time comes, I’ll be paying for their crimes as well, like I have been for many other people’s crimes since 2000.
There needs to be a way for everyone to be able to get off this thing. No body should be punished for life just because some one thinks you could commet another crime. Even a SVP should have a way out. Maybe if we can petition the court’s . 10 years is fine for low risk, 20 years seem good for medium to high risk, and 30 for all the rest. At least give us a chance , if we commet another crime then by all means have life to register. I don’t under stand them saying if your crime was before 1987 you get off immediately . So when I get to my 30 year mark I can get off to? Why would there crime be any different than mine? We need a way to put all this crap behind us. Just saying.
I don’t think anyone needs to get all up in arms just yet. This boondoggle has a LONG ways to go. First, a lawmaker has to carry to bill (CASOMB can’t introduce a bill on their own). Then the committees get involved. Then it moves amongst the Senate and Assembly. And all along the way, everyone gets their chance to amend it. Maybe, eventually, possibly, but not probably, something lands on the Governor’s desk. And maybe, just MAYBE, he may sign it. Or not.
The point is, absolutely NOTHING is in concrete. Not until the Governor signs something (if it ever gets that far).
Will the Static-99R scam be incorporated into this fictitious “tiered” registry?
Take a look at who is on CASOMB: http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=1235
I count two prosecutors, five law enforcement (police, CDCR, probation), and three pseudo psychologists financed by the state and/or law enforcement. Arguably, 10 of the 13 current board members — or about 77% — of the California Sex Offender Management Board have a conflict-of-interest when it comes to determining laws that oppress individuals labeled a “Registered Sex Offender.”
– The prosecutors have a motive in keeping harsh sex offender laws (increased funding, more jobs to help grow their organization, political popularity for their organizations).
– Law enforcement have a clear motive in keeping harsh sex offender laws (increased funding, more jobs to help grow their organization, political popularity for their organizations).
– Pseudo psychologists have a clear motive in keeping harsh sex offender laws (more “treatment” contracts and/or requirements that increase funding, as well as jobs to help grow their ranks).
While these people may not be considered “bleeding hearts,” these are people who — as history has shown to us — should never be trusted. They, and their organizations, have done nothing but advocate for and enforce harsh “sex offender” laws. What makes you think it will be different this time around?
Read the following paper about CASOMB “withholding information:”
http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/jpj_bad_data.pdf
Refer to page 13. Page 13 states the following:
“The [California Sex Offender Management Board] is an official body of the California government and all documents discussed at its meetings are required to be publicly available. The CDCR recidivism reports were posted for a period of time on the [CASOMB] website, but were later removed. [CASOMB] rejected repeated requests by the authors of this paper for copies of the original report, but did provide a copy of the October 2008 revised report. Alongside ‘cautionary statements about the interpretation and use of these data,’ the report states, ‘The data provided here and the conclusions that may be drawn from them are consistent with other studies of sex offender recidivism. Repeated studies have resulted in similar findings: the recidivism rate of convicted sex offenders is considerably lower than is often believed and most sex offenders are not ever convicted of a subsequent sexual offense.’ The [CASOMB] does not provide this report on its website, despite the legal requirement that it be available to the public.”
If for some reason you still trust police, prosecutors, and pseudo psychologists: CASOMB’s lack of transparency may be enough reason to seriously question its propaganda and underlying motive. Look at this instance: Nancy O’Malley is refusing to release details to PUBLIC policy, as it is “set in stone.” Again, lack of transparency. The public has a RIGHT to know these things. It’s called the California Public Records Act. See Government Code Sections 6250 to 6276.48.
Last ACSOL meeting, most of the room clapped when it was announced this “tiered registry” would be introduced. A few people did not clap. I suspect the few people who did not clap were the realists who knew there is more behind this “tiered registry” scam. I agree with some of you. The tiered registry will help only a few. While the remainder will be “thrown under the bus,” so to speak.
The people who do not benefit from this tiered registry scam will remain on the registry. Fewer. And ostensibly more “dangerous” to the public and law enforcement’s scrutiny. Is this something we REALLY want? There are many unintended consequences to a “tiered” registry. Be careful what you ask for.
Best news I’ve heard in many years , The pendulem is actualy swinging our way.
Thanks Janace !
I tend to believe there will be more convolution to this fictitious tier than the tax code. Especially if they incorporate the Static 99R scam to determine the tiers. It was mentioned that the Static scam was never intended for individualized assessment, but for “triage of prison populations.” Let’s watch as California will be the first state to use the Static 99 scam in a way it was never intended to be used. Because according to the baffoons that want the Static scams used: non contact offenders will get higher scores (presumably leading to longer registration periods) than violent offenders. Makes no sense the Static 99R scam gives extra point to non contacts, whereas violent offenders get NO points. Tier registration is phony baloney!!
I opposed this tiered system when CASOMB has empirically supported that the recidivism rate is below 1% for two consecutive years and no other set of convicts or ex-convicts do not share the same consequence?
The automatic drop off is 30 years.
The petition is 10 and 20 years.
The only difference between what is current now and this proposed system is 30 years. That’s 30 years of service to the state of California. That’s longer than many careers!
I am no longer a convict since I earned my 1203.4, correct? CASOMB has proven the recidivism rates for the past four years are significantly low around 1%, with the last two years of research providing rates of under 1%. And I will still have to petition in 10 years, or 20 years, or no relief at all based upon “i have no idea” facts. How is this any different than now?
The tiered system makes no sense at all. In fact, it solidifies that is it NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL to impose such an extended length, with suspect requirements that cannot be revised nor revisited.
Janice, their proposal is NOT A COMPROMISE. If anything, it is a political ploy for them to say that CASOMB offered a tiered system when automatic relief and their lawyers rejected it. It is complete manure dung to propose this disaster upon the face that the registrant recidivism rate is below 1% and dropping.
I dunno… the law isn’t here to help rehabilitate the registrant community. Less than 1% recidivism rate and you still deserve 10, 20, to 30 years for most of us if they have their way. They are not using facts still.
1985 Felony, waiting to have a life back that was gone during my latent teenage years(My Boyfriend, that I am STILL friends with, he is now straight and married with children). Thanks SCOTUS for CONTINUAL PUNISHMENT, may since Scalia passed we will get an educated Democrat and RC’s will all get a chance to hold a job, a home (even the new builders ask have you EVER been convicted), residency stay., and poss. off the iinternet in part, atleast MLS, not the housing for sale site. National AND State.
They (SCOTUS) needs to REVISIT how RC’s are treated and REALIZE we ARE Continually Punished and SO Restrictive that NO REHAB is even Considered. By the way, my B.A. from a Cali Univ. has no bearing in my employment search.
Thanks for all 50 comments on this one all writers.
Atleast we HAVE a Board(CASOMB) unlike other states that atleast listen to a point and think some things through.
Good Point New Person and David and David H.
Maybe more qualified people will come to work on the CASOMB.
It’s just better than what we have at this writ.
It STILL needs reform AND actual rehab besides charging for Counseling/Therapy (Group or not).
This is not the end with this Tiered System upcoming, just a step above current, that’s all.
Let’s see after their Nov. meet what the minutes from Oct 20th really state before jumping the gun.
I’m pretty sure part of what the 6th circuit decision was that they couldn’t go back and re-classify, change sor’s tiers after the fact. As I have said before California already has a “system” that people are placed in. Low risk, serious offender (probably most of us) and svp. There is no doubt they will try to create new restrictions for the higher tiers which is bs and why many here are against the tier registry. Ohio also had the same issue and court ruled they couldn’t change the tiers.
Last meeting someone brought up a point that the max registration period should be 17 years for someone who remains offense free during that time. Why have 20 and 30 year levels? Max should be 17… maybe 20 if it makes the crooked politicians and the phony hacks at casomb feel better about themselves.
I think the major stumbling block for the tiered registry will be that people just don’t understand science, that it is not absolute truth, but proportional. Absolute truth is belief and untestable. If they find one example of a registrant getting off the registry and commiting a crime it will cast doubt on the 17 year guideline. A little doubt invalidates belief. It is the snow ball in Congress or the 110 year old cigar smoking whiskey drinker to prove that global warming is a hoax or that smoking is harmless. Take away that security blanket of absolute belief, people get edgy. You can take it away but you have to provide some other positive assurance in its place.
CASOMB made the same recommendation a couple of years ago and nothing happened. My hopes are not up.
where are our civil rights leaders???? what are they waiting for?????who are these others that janice talked about????why isn’t the justification for these laws being challenged????how come our civil rights leaders aren’t challenging the courts in every case to justify these laws?????
A positive thing, the CASOMB is not made up with RC lovers and/or advocates and the information that they are sending out is a serious poke in the eye of the status quo. There is a rule what trends in California, trends in the rest of the Country.
I think this is wonderful news. We all must remain confident! My only concern is, what’s the petition princess? Is it similar to a Certificate of Rehabitatiom? Or, is it black and white (no arrests/10-20 years passed/granted). I attempted to obtain a 15 year old (expunged battery/summary probation/model citizen) and the DA of OC made me out like this case was murder etc.
I live in a state with a tiered system. I’m torn on the issue. I can’t really sit here and say with a straight face that I do not support it since I’m a level 1.
I’m off of it in a year, I knew when this process started that I would have a light at the end of the tunnel but so did people in New York who had to register for 10 years and than 20. I’m never really confident that even if when I’m done registering that somehow the government won’t change the rules. But knowing that I have a chance to live without my name plastered everywhere has giving me some hope in life and that is a good feeling. But i also know that when towns pass new ordinances restricting where people can live or what they can do, they usually leave the tier 1 alone but come down hard on the tier 2 and 3. People view tier 2 and 3 as sexual predators and in the news you will always here that the higher the tier the more likely and dangerous they are to reoffend. This is obviously completely false and their is very little sometimes that separates level 1, 2 and 3. For example I had consensual relationship with a teen and if i was older by a few months or she was younger by a few months, I would be a level 2 or 3. Also if I had picture of her on my computer that would have been child pornography and I would be level 3. Somehow I can go from someone being not a threat to a violent predator just like that.
Pennsylvania and Nevada had decent systems before they went to the new rules where people were individually evaluated not by a set of rules. My state recently changes its guidelines but lucky for me, nothing was made retroactive and I’m allowed to finish my sentence under the old rules.
So a tiered system is nice for a few but many get really screwed by being a 2 or a 3. The general public truly believes that there is a rigorous evaluation of each offender and that it is a fair process. You have no say in this process as an offender.
Moderator, please start monitoring the comments better. Joe, I was unaware you controlled the comments. People aren’t interested in your poorly constructed comments. You sound very angry. As noted, has anyone got off the registry via a tiered system? Thank you