IL: Federal judge – City of Chicago did not violate rights of homeless sex offenders

Admin

A Chicago federal judge recently ended a lawsuit filed by two homeless sex offenders who claimed Chicago city officials violated their civil rights by not allowing them to comply with sex offender registry laws. Full Article

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

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

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. 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.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. 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.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. 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.
  23. 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.  
 

3 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

From the article:

”
Blakey said the legal basis for the plaintiffs’ claim revolved around their evidence to show a continuous policy of abuse by city officials.

The court terminated the lawsuit because the plaintiffs demonstrated “occasional lapses of judgment” or “individual misconduct by police officers,” not “systemic problems” or “institutional behavior,” Blakey said in the ruling.
”

That seems quite odd. Evidence to show a continuous policy abuse by city officials to be followed by the judge stating “individual misconduct by police officers” – plural. So there is proof of policy abuse by city officials. The Police Officers represent the City. Note, the quote stated officers, as in more than one officer.

So committing an offense against a registrant does not count as a sex crime? In another article presented in ACSOL, shoplifting as a registrant raises the level of criminality to felony class. So why isn’t the same applied everywhere?

Bill of attainder, please.

0
Reply

Interesting, the Skilfull Tactics at play?

So by not permitting the Registered Person to Registered Temporary Domicile the Government Agents instituted a De Facto violation for Non-Compliance which effectively placed Registered Person in serious jeopardy of Federal Prosecution & De Facto continue Punishment.

Now the questions begs and Calls Out Loud!

How many such Skillfuly Played Out and Executed Criminal Prosecutions have been illicitly carried out throughout the United States in totality?

What effect and what Damages have been suffered by the Victimized Registered Person and Victimized Innocent Family, along with Loved Friends & Associates?

Could it be, 3 fold, 5 fold, perhaps 10 fold is a Reasoned Preliminary Prediction.

As Yehovah Lives, so should we

0
Reply

Being required to do what is forbidden is a clear indication of an insane system. The court made the wrong call.

0
Reply