ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

General CommentsGeneral News

General Comments April 2017

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of April 2017. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Tiered registry 4/18 bill hearing cancelled by author anyone have any info?

It could very well be pulled to make recommended changes to the bill before it’s rescheduled.

By the way it’s described in the other post it seems that Sen. Lara has abandoned the Tiered Registry entirely.

I’ve said so in times passed,

“In this Match for The Rights & Titles illicitly torn & stolen from The People of the Land of The Americans there will be Surprizes”

Contacting the offices of Lara could yield some understanding to his choice of action, Is it a:
1. rescheduling of the proposed bill? Or
2. a complete canceling of the proposal?

If the answer is a Rejected goal to Correct Human Error misguided as all Human Errors have always been, are, & will be. Then efforts to True Justice must be resolute & doubled.

Who can continue to tolerate 70 years or 840 moons of such Innovations that have produced Lost Opportunities of Life,

Who can Recompense The Lost coins?
Who can Resurrect to life Lost blemished lambs sacrificed on Defiled Alters of Justice?
Who can Reconcile Lost Sons & Daughters to their Forgiving Mothers & Fathers?

I speak Truth

As Yehovah Lives, so should we

Son of liberty I can never understand ur long rambling posts filled with odd grammar. I feel like u have important input, so I would ask u to please be more concise. I would like to know what ur ideas are about. Thanks

100% agreed, I’ve noticed the same.

I also cannot understand your cryptic posts Son of Liberty Child of Freedom. I’m better at understanding plain english. I want to be able to understand you since you post often, but most times I no longer take the time to read your posts since it leaves me scratching my head. Maybe you will consider being less cryptic so we can all understand what you are saying.

Good day Hopeful, Joel123, & esteemed Lake County I thank you for your interest & questions regarding what I have written and the ideas contained within each message.

If life where “to Be” more fundamentally simple, in that the whole face of the earth would still speak in One language as it once did.

I could then with ease and pleasure encapsulate or weave the many complicated issues set before the path of the present day.

The reality that every mind is a World unto It Self, I endeavourer to reach as many of those audiences and peak the curiosity in a unorthodox use of allegory, analogy, and apologia that Western Hellenized Civil Society has been founded from time immemorial, that is to say “so old that it seems always to have existed”.

In addition it should be remembered that The Conquering Roman Empire is not the progenitor but commandeered The principles of those peoples made Subject to the Roman Jurisdiction or if I may de fuse the term correctly as Juris-Dictation of a combination of Hellene, Carthaginian, Aramean, with a obscured fountain of Hebraic revelations that build on firm convincing logic.

Furthermore we may repeal the veneers that conceal the drastic contrast between Eastern Thought and Western Thought. The effort to delve into the subject will enable a person with the capacity to build rapport with those you seek to gain empathy when invited to stand upon your footsteps.

It must be acknowledged that Religion has had a great influence on society because it has had the position of a Moral Fixed Point to which security, assurance, predictability are unto this day a anchoring for the human mind, the human mind has a normal need for a purpose of Being Whole and Filled Completely and a reasonable self interest is Just and can not be disparaged.

Knowing this I do not intend to proselytize any person to any particular religious belief even of my own. I do intend to allow any who wishes to empathize and sympathize to better reason and walk with their fellow to reach mutual clear understanding.

As all things of great and true value require sincere effort to acquire. The Study of Philosophy, Anthropology, Biblical Studies, and Language are the doors that need to be opened for your minds to inhabit and possess these spaces.

I offer the following subject in the hopes they will stimulate vision and forsight:
Josephus: The Complete Works in Hardcover
Gender and Rhetoric in Plato’s Political Thought Reissue Edition

I speak Truth
As Yehovah Lives, so should we

I don’t understand what you said, but I do hope you don’t think we intended to be disrespectful to you. We just though you should know that many of us just cannot understand your messages that may be of importance to us all.

Son of Liberty: This is your reality. I have figured out for myself that there is no god. I studied the bible for 40 years and have attended church and thought at one time I was a child of god. I now understand a different reality. I still believe in a life after but not the kind that you do. This forum is very important to our cause and is made up of many different types of people, religious and non. I think what folks are saying to you, including me is that you have another motive (possibly to save souls) and you are using this group as your audience as you speak from your virtual pulpit. I, like the others, respect your beliefs and wisdom. But, I would rather hear your religious free opinions and ideas on how the current state of affairs affects you and ideas you have that can help others. You see, not everyone shares your religious enthusiasm and it really is distracting. Honestly, I only read about half of your comment above before I lost interest. It’s all the same to me. As I totally respect you for your beliefs, you can respect those of us whom would rather not hear of your personal beliefs and just communicate with us with neutrality.


Yes, Son, your religious rhetoric and imagery interferes with your legal and political aspect of your posts. I have stopped reading them as it is difficult to get through them.

@BSL & @ml

BSL you stated:

“Honestly, I only read about half of your comment above before I lost interest.”

I understand you most Probably did not read my stated intent, so I posit here again to gain clarity for all interest.

“Knowing this I do not intend to proselytize any person to any particular religious belief even of my own. I do intend to allow any who wishes to empathize and sympathize to better reason and walk with their fellow to reach mutual clear understanding.

As all things of great and true value require sincere effort to acquire. The Study of Philosophy, Anthropology, Biblical Studies, and Language are the doors that need to be opened for your minds to inhabit and possess these spaces.

I offer the following subject in the hopes they will stimulate vision and foresight:”

Now having restated that. I do not take any offence should you elect or consent Not to read any of what I write.


ml you stated:

“I have stopped reading them as it is difficult to get through them.”

I’m honored that you & BSL took the time to even read a quarter of each message I have written and that you or any one finds my messages attracting is also a credit to the Reality that Western Thought is Fused with.

I posit again the following, since I can Correctly Infer from your statement that you most Probably did Not read the whole message I wrote.

“It must be acknowledged that Religion has had a great influence on society because it has had the position of a Moral Fixed Point to which security, assurance, predictability are unto this day a anchoring for the human mind, the human mind has a normal need for a purpose of Being Whole and Filled Completely and a reasonable self interest is Just and can not be disparaged.”

But allow me to release you from any Idea or Implicit thought that you are Obligated to read & follow the links I provide or any other persons Posts. I for one Do Not read every persons messages.

Kind regards
I speak a True Song
As Yehovah Lives, so should those who consent to Live as Yehovah.
Son of Liberty Child of Freedom

Son Of Liberty:
“It must be acknowledged that lack of religion has had a great influence on society and myself because it has led me to a position of a morality to which exceeds the terrible judgment on fellow human kind by religious folks who want to banish people who are different, past and present. Telling LGBT they will burn in hell. Stoning of your wife for adultery, Keeping and trading of human slaves, and many more atrocious judgments the religious have cast against mankind. My mind is fulfilled and my purpose is to first love and care for my fellow human kind and then myself unconditionally. With my life based on LOVE, giving, and helping others I cannot be disparaged.” I am full and fulfilled without your god. And I have peace and assurance in my heart that I will carry on after this life.
Love and Peace Brother 😀


Your initial response stated:

“Honestly, I only read about half of your comment above before I lost interest. It’s all the same to me.”

It is clear to correctly infer you have Not lost interest in my messages & that it is Not all the same to you, regarding my messages which I Did Not write for you personally.

I reiterate from my first & second message:

“The reality that every mind is a World unto It Self, I endeavourer to reach as many of those audiences and peak the curiosity in a unorthodox use of allegory, analogy, and apologia that Western Hellenized Civil Society has been founded from time immemorial, that is to say “so old that it seems always to have existed”.

“But allow me to release you from any Idea or Implicit thought that you are Obligated to read & follow the links I provide or any other persons Posts. I for one Do Not read every persons messages.

Kind regards
I speak a True Song
As Yehovah Lives, so should those who consent to Live as Yehovah.
Son of Liberty Child of Freedom”


Now In regard to your last statement:

“I am full and fulfilled without your god. ”

Allow me to again reiterate from my first message:

“Knowing this I do not intend to proselytize any person to any particular religious belief even of my own. I do intend to allow any who wishes to empathize and sympathize to better reason and walk with their fellow to reach mutual clear understanding.”

Now when I wrote “to better reason and walk with their fellow” fellow being persons Not on this ACSOL web site but the public & those in positions to have effect over the Laws of the Land of the United States Of The American’s & any projections that can have influence on the World at Large. That is the Contexts of my messages – The Contexts is Not your personal life.

So BSL, I attempt once again to Release & Free you from your own Limited Human Intuitive Judgement founded in your mind that manifested it self into a Idea or Implicit Thought that you were Obligated or Chosen by Attraction to read my messages as I walk upon my Path.

I spoke, speak, & will speak a True Song

As יְהֹוָה YEHOVAH אֶחָד* Lived, Lives, Will Live, so should we


If that’s what you want to believe! But you are absolutely wrong. Your reality will never be mine. Mine will never be yours. I am not interested in your content, nor am I drawn to what you are saying. You sure do give yourself a lot of credit that you are somehow a chosen messenger and that people are meant to read what you say. That my friend, is a load of crap. I only respond because you are somehow holding this position that you are right and I am wrong and if only I read the word of God, I mean the words of you, I will some how be taken by them spiritually. Nope, it’s not happening and I’m writing you to assure you of this. You are not special, You do not have any blessings or spiritual insights I don’t have. There are no chosen people. BTW, I read This:
“Honestly, I only read about half of your comment above before I lost interest. It’s all the same to me.

”It is clear to correctly infer you have Not lost interest in my messages & that it is Not all the same to you, regarding my messages which I Did Not write for you personally. ” SKIPPED EVERYTHING ELSE and read this:
“So BSL, I attempt once again to Release & Free you from your own Limited Human Intuitive Judgement founded in your mind that manifested it self into a Idea or Implicit Thought that you were Obligated or Chosen by Attraction to read my messages as I walk upon my Path. ”

I read nothing else in between and I don’t care to. SO you can say all you want, but you are incorrect. I am not going to waste my time bickering with you any longer. There are more important things to do on this website then to watch you tout your religious rant thinking you are reaching the heart of man. I am blessed by life, I am happy where I am. I respond because I am correct. You respond because you are correct. Two different realities that will not change one another.

I have to concur, I believe that you have a lot of good information and insight to offer HOWEVER, it tends to get lost in the additional rhetoric you leave in your posts. The archaic religious reference at the end also tends to undermine your intended messages.
This is NOT meant to suggest censoring but I believe you have to take your potential audience in mind when you write these posts.

I find his closing fine, and I appreciate direct biblical references as they support our stance and show how the politicians and those supporting the registry are in direct conflict with the religious beliefs many of the “claim” to hold.

However, I do agree that his messages get lost when they are hard to translate into modern English. I would hope he can find a middle ground as he is a valuable contributor.

I can read and understand what you post…

As Yehovah Lives, so should we

Questions to be considered: Where does churches stand on getting rid of the sex offender registry? We are told to obey the laws of the land but after someone has paid their debt is it not evil to keep adding punitive measures after the fact? If so then shouldn’t the church stand against such evil? Anointing comes not just from doing good for others but standing against evil Prv. 16:25 (…ways that seems right but are evil). If the Church refuses to stand against these fundamental wrongs how can they expect anointing and growth to take place? The Lord’s view on who’s a sex offender is anyone that looks upon a woman in lust has committed adultery already in their hearts. With that standard in mind how many sex offenders attend your church? Your argument might be well we are under Grace and forgiven those transgressions. Really? Then doesn’t His Grace reach as far as those being wrongfully punished after they have paid their debt to society? You might also say well those are consequences of their sin/crimes. What are the consequences to the church for not Abiding in Christ and walking as he did in the Earth? Lost anointing and spiritual growth perhaps? How did God’s Grace (through Jesus) handle the adulteress (Sex Offender) that was sentenced (by law) to death? Are you refusing Christ and His example by not showing equal compassion for those that have paid their debt to society? Where does this kind of harm stop? Shouldn’t we exercise Christ like compassion and stand against this LIVING DEATH called the sex offender registry? There have been children listed as young as 9 years old on that evil draconian thing. The church needs to stop following the popular dictates of the world and society. While we were yet sinners God sent His only son to die for us. Given the Lord’s example in this regard who are we NOT to stand against the sex offender registry?

I was researching the Ira Mark Ellman debunking of the SCOTUS “frightening and high” recidivism lies that were provided by the Solicitor General, and came across this from 2015:

For more on Error Coram Nobis, see this:

So my question is, is it “ripe” to challenge this given the current Packingham case working its way through SCOTUS and what would have to be done to challenge Smith V Doe and Conecticut Dept of Public Safety V Doe? Would the original McKune v. Lile, 536 U.S. 24,33 (2002) have to be challenged as well, since that is specifically when the SG provided false and misleading data?

Does it have to be challenged by only those that originally challenged it, and are they still alive?

From what I read, it looks like it has to be challenged by the original person in the same court, but perhaps since the original case infected so many after it, that anyone in a previous challenge like Smith V Doe or Con Dept of PS V Doe could also challenge?

I read that this challenge worked against the Japanese internment issues from WWII.

Something needs to be done. We can’t just live with injustice if there is a means to fight it.

A Constitutional lawyer or Appellate lawyer (maybe someone at a law school?) may be best to answer these questions if Chance and/or Janice cannot opine on it. Something to consider for the conference in two months, I say.

The problem these cases are going to have once it reaches SCOTUS is the rational basis test. SCOTUS has declared in several other cases that the Constitution doesn’t protect us from stupid laws or laws not backed by empirical evidence. There only needs to be a “rational basis” for the law, even if the basis is unfounded or even false.

The rational basis is based upon the five factors the SCOTUS used to promote the registry due to public safety. Note, the premise of the whole registry was due to the reliance upon false facts. See Korematsu (japanese internment camps).

The five factors dictated what is set as regulatory. Today’s rules go beyond what is designated as regulatory and ventures into punitive design.

1. Registry is about promoting the conviction to the public. In California and other states, getting your case dismissed doesn’t get you off the registry. It’s rational to see today’s rules are punitive compared to what was originally set forth.

2. Registrants have freedom to live, travel, or work without restrictions. Also, they do not have to go in person to register annually, which is punitive. Guess what… today’s laws surpass all those, especially registering in person. That is something the SCOTUS used as a specific example of what is punitive – registering in person.

3. Used 80% recidivism rate. That is the only data presented and no other sets of data. Other data was not used, despite the availability. See Korematsu.

4. Registrants are treated as a group. There are differences between registrants. In a recent article, Utah has a backlog on all registrants in prison. They’re going to treat low level registrants different from high level ones. Bill of attainder here.

There’s a comparative rational basis here. Michigan’s Snyder denotes this as well as rational basis of “does this registration system work?” Apparently, Snyder founded there wasn’t a rational basis for registration.

I (surprise!) agree with your points, and had had similar thoughts. You summed them up succinctly compared to what I had in mind.

Reading the original judgment (, it’s plain to see that all five items SCOTUS listed have been overrun. Hopefully that swings things in our favor. I see things this way:
1. SCOTUS said that the govt is merely publishing “accurate information about a criminal record, most of which is already public.” So except for dismissals/acquittals, this factor probably remains unchanged.
2. Read the case and see how every single item SCOTUS said wasn’t happening now does. I see this factor now completely tipped our way.
3. We all know the 80% lie. Hopefully this one tips our way, given the recidivism is statistically similar to pretty much any crime. My fear is SCOTUS will simply say that any registry for any offense is cool with them.
4. Rational connection to public safety remains…however weak the public safety risk actually is. I don’t see this factor changing in our favor at all. What I do see is perhaps a 14th Amendment Equal Protection issue with juveniles being treated differently. (Apparently 80% only kicks in on one’s 18th birthday?)
5. This factor hinges totally on the non-punitive idea.
I think Factor Two is our biggest weapon in arguing, notwithstanding the presentation of correct recidivism data–including perhaps NCMEC itself ‘fessing up about 90% being “insiders.”

I fear there will always be a registry, but hopefully some sense can be applied to it (regardless of its uselessness). I’m of the mind that SCOTUS is either going to cement things in place once and for all, or start millions of cracks leading towards crumbling of the “it’s just regulatory” lie.

BTW, SCOTUS has another SO petition before it ( My gut says that if they accept it, they’re ready to take on the whole SO topic full-force (Packingham, and perhaps Snyder and this one).


As I wrote on another SOL website comment section, I believe the SO registry topic outcome will be able to be applied to all registries regardless of the type (felony) or crime (any) and allowing more registries is the scary part because of how popular they have become for public consumption.

Indeed a valid fear. If it falls that way, I guess we’ll all just have to become registry advocates and push for so many various ones that a tipping-point amount of the population is swallowed up. If that becomes the case, the German party leaders from the 30’s will be smiling from their places in Hell.


Oh wow! I didn’t know about this case. It’s very interesting. I wonder if SCOTUS will cite its own self as a source stating that recidivism rates are “frightening and high” to say it’s okay to hold keeping SO’s incarcerated beyond their mandatory release date?

That would definitely be interesting!

AJ, about this part:

“1. SCOTUS said that the govt is merely publishing “accurate information about a criminal record, most of which is already public.” So except for dismissals/acquittals, this factor probably remains unchanged.”

I don’t think it remains unchanged. The government now doesn’t just provide the list, but it created laws against people on the list that automatically infers a great sense of dangerousness. At the time of the SCOTUS ruling, they hadn’t yet banned those on the list from being allowed government financial housing assistance or added residency restrictions or specifically said on the EEOC web site that it is ok to discriminate against us in jobs. Since the government controls these restrictions aimed at people on the “list”, it is no longer just a list of factual information but a list of those to discriminate against with government leading the way.

Chris F,

Sorry for the delay in replying. I wholly agree with your statements. My point was that the elements of Factor 1 that SCOTUS stated probably hasn’t changed. That they are doing more WITH that data doesn’t change that they’re simply publishing publicly available data.


FYI for those of you seeking a passport…

I got my new passport a couple weeks back and there’s no Scarlett Letter on it. If you’re thinking of travelling soon, you’d better go ahead and get one while the gettin’ is good. I can’t imagine trying to find a hotel that would let you stay with something like that written on your passport. And showing that at the airport ticket counter… I just wouldn’t travel at all. And that’s of course what the Congress wants. We’re not wanted in the US anymore, but they don’t want us leaving either.

I’d avoid getting too comfortable and sure, as IML allows State to revoke passports which do not have the special designator. Hopefully they’d let a citizen know before doing that, but I’d not be surprised if one only finds out when attempting to use the passport.

In short, State may simply have issued your passport under old procedures and will get back to you once the whole process is in place. 🙁


I hope not. Travel is the only thing I live for these days. My family and old friends are out of the picture now, and I have no one. So I just work and save money to travel solo for a few months and try to enjoy what little enjoyment there is to be found in life. It’s pointless to travel within the US, because what kind of vacation can be had if you’re checking in and out of states as you move around? Some of the county sheriffs are draconian and demand you get your hotel to sign an acknowledgement that they understand you’re a S.O. Of course the hotels won’t let you stay there.

All the government wants from me is to be their work mule, pay my earnings to Caesar, and sit at home alone crying into my beer with no ability to enjoy anything at all. Tell me again… How is this saving children?

I hear you brother/sister! I, too, love to travel and would like to do so without being flagged or prohibited. From the sounds of it, you’re flying solo in life anymore….any chance you can just permanently move to a country that either likes to thumb its nose at American pushiness or doesn’t get so draconian about sexual items? For the former, France of old comes to mind (can you say Roman Polanski?). For the latter, any country currently or formerly under Dutch rule would be a good place to try. (Plenty of gorgeous places in the Caribbean that were or are under the Dutch.)

**Note that I have not traveled since IML kicked in, so have no idea if either France or any Dutch entity is workable anymore.

Domestically, last I checked Minnesota (MN) doesn’t require any notification until present in-state for 14 or more days ( MN also probably doesn’t put your info out to the public. I say probably because I don’t know how they do it for people convicted in other states; if convicted in MN, I know they don’t put it out. One thing to be very careful of in MN is that you’re getting admitted to any health care facility (i.e. hospitalized for an appendicitis), you must inform hospital personnel that you’re a RSO, as well as tell LE that you’re being admitted (Subd. 4 of same Statute).

As an aside, MN is one of a few states refusing to comply with SORNA, etc. This, despite MN being the home of the Wetterlings (Jacob, Patty, et al) and Dru Sjodin. A bit ironic, isn’t it?

As to the sheriffs and their demands, do you ever ask for them to show you the applicable law or regulation requiring such documentation from the hotel? Of course the expected outcome is that Barney Fife will just “happen by” and let the proprietor know…probably resulting in your getting bounced out.

If you are admitted to a hospital? In ICU? Under heavy doses of narcotics? You are suppose to call the police? I wonder if the hospital is required to notify the patients on the unit that there is a ex criminal in room 501. I guess a sign on the door would take care of that.

Nothing like taking a concept beyond common sense and to hyperbole.

As to your question about the hospital notifying, etc. Nope. In fact if I recall correctly, they are prohibited from doing so. Here’s some twisted logic on it though: MN only releases Level II and III information to places that might be at risk (i.e. health care facilities), yet a Level I must self-report. The only time MN shares information as publicly and widespread as you played up is for Level IIIs.

Does anyone know of a counselor or therapist that is sensible and is willing to provide assessments for Cert. of Rehab? I’m looking for a professional in the State of California, I guess it really doesn’t matter where.

I used Dr. Ryan Jordan from Dr. Veronica Thomas’ office in Tustin, CA. I was told she’s very reputable for this type of assessment. I received a very positive assessment from Dr. Jordan. He was pleasant and I’d recommend him. It was a few years ago, however, so I’m not sure if he works there anymore.

Mind if I ask who referred you to Dr. Thomas’ office?

Charlene Steyn was very good and used to perform evaluations for defense teams. I don’t know if she still does and she would be getting on in years now. However, she literally “wrote the book” on evaluations some years ago and has been very effective in representing the interests of Registrants.

She and I blew the whistle ten years ago on the murder of Registrant Michael Dodele in Lakeport, CA in which the authorities (and local newspapers) were trying to cover up the fact that his murder was entirely due to his being a Registrant (he was stabbed to death in his own home by a neighbor who broke into his trailer thinking, erroneously, that he was a “child molester”). Fortunately, we were able to get the attention of Lee Romney at the L.A. Times who blew the lid off of it.

I’m afraid I no longer have her contact information but she is worth a Google search. The last I heard of her she was travelling the world and doing occasional consulting work for defense teams.

David Kennerly, I remember that case well. I often think of that case since I live so close to Lakeport. There are many dangerous attitudes in this County.

The local papers (I believe there were two) quickly removed my comments pointing out that it was clearly a murder predicated upon his registry status. They tried very hard to cover that up. I called Lee Romney at the LA Times alerting her to the murder and referred her to Charlene Steyn, who had been Dodele’s evaluator and who gave an interview and had also interviewed the murderer! It made the local rags and the cops look like shit. It was beautiful!

We only have one printed paper, The Record Bee. It’s a very useless paper that is mostly for advertisements. We have an independent on line news called Lakeconews. They do whatever they want and no longer post comments. We have no TV news coverage.

There was a second paper but it may have been in a nearby community. But yeah, the “Bee” did delete my comment.

The police stated that the murder was unconnected to the Registry and that the killer and Dodele knew each other as neighbors (they did not) and had a falling-out.

And having your comments deleted is not such a big deal here as it would have just fallen on deaf ears. Lake County spends much of their resources fighting and settling lawsuits from their many ignorant and illegal activities. We have too many poorly educated people in this county that will only believe in false media rumors. Our public access channel is known as the conspiracy theory channel since they mostly broadcast things involving “alternative facts”. I miss the higher education level of the Bay area.

Perhaps try the guy I listed below. He suggested I come and see him again when I’m ready to attempt a COR. He gave me a favorable psych eval that my attorney used during negotiations with the DA. The contact info is from 4 years ago. Hopefully it hasn’t changed.

Alfred Fricke, Ph.D.
177 Bovet Rd. #545
San Mateo, CA 94402

Doesn’t it seem odd that (for the most part) legislatures don’t impose residency restrictions retroactively? Hmm, perhaps they see it as unconstitutional in some way. In my state I’m a risk at 1500′ if convicted prior to July 1, 2006, but if convicted tomorrow, I become a risk at 3000’…unless I had already established residency prior to the conviction. So let’s get this straight, risk is based on date of conviction or when I move in to a place, not on anything to do with my crime or my personal risk level. Yup, non-punitive all the way.


How do they arrive at these distances? Do they strap a plethysmogragh on a representative sample of former offenders and see what the readings are when placed at various distances from a school or park?

I think they write a bunch of numbers on index cards and have an intern pull one out. What’s REALLY scary is MS settled on 3000′ after legislation originally said 5 miles. Yes, miles.

Of course the unconstitutionally vague issue of how that distance is measured remains. Crow flight? Shortest Google Map route? Corner to corner of property? Center to center? Must I hire a land surveyor to solve it for me? (I was told by a PO about an ICOTS parolee who got sent back to her from PA because their GPS unit measured his property as being 8″ too close to whatever banned real estate. Ridiculous.)

On top of that huge question is the problem that MS’s GIS site (, “Education 2016”), which is the closest one can get to any sort of proper info and purports to show every school, day care, etc., isn’t even complete or correct…and is broken more often than not.

Has anyone had a Saturday compliance check?

I installed a camera for the primary purpose of knowing the comiance check had been done. So far the closest thing was last Saturday when two men came by the house when I was out. They were dressed professionally and could have been cops, or they could have been Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Anyone ever get a visit on a Saturday a.m.?

They will show up any day they have time including weekends. They are currently looking for me. I have seen them park in front of my house twice today. I will try and get them to look for me as long as possible so it will cost the taxpayers as much as possible. I can’t stop them from watching my house, but I can make it hard for them to get their complacence check. I consider it a challenge.

Lake County…. ha major props to you! Ha

A person after my own heart!

I actually also hide out from compliance checks, and simply don’t answer the door. I do have an upstairs window that I can carefully peer out of…though, in truth, I don’t think they have come by for several years…

However, at that time they caught me unawares….and I actually allowed them to check my computer, (I had nothing to hide, so what the heck), but in retrospect this was an insane mistake, and I realized then, and now, that I can never afford to let this happen again, (who knows what they are doing, or might do while one has you distracted, the other is fiddling around in your computer?)

As long as they are not bothering your neighbors….avoiding compliance checks seems like a good idea.

Good luck to everyone,


OMG, volunteered your computer to be checked? That is insanity!!! I’m glad you wont do that again. Remember that websites can push any picture onto your computer without your knowledge. And you can’t even be sure that any adult porn site doesn’t have even 1 photo of an underage person. Even a thumbnail size picture will get you into prison. And is it possible some police officer feels you are very dangerous and society needs to be protected from you at all costs….You bet there are cops like that.

What the heck, indeed! Never do that! Not only is there the possibility of something being planted but, do we even KNOW what is considered “abuse images” anymore?

This category has gotten extraordinarily broad and all-encompassing. You would be shocked at what is now being prosecuted.

Lake County –

Did they leave a calling card or some sort of doorknob hanging notification they were there?

No paper notices telling me they were at my house. I just seen them out there twice and I also heard someone honk their horn that afternoon, but I don’t respond to horn honks (that’s why we have phones). My gated and locked front yard is my most valuable asset. I doubt they looked for me today since it was raining. No need to worry about (so called) public safety issues if it’s raining. lol

They have to same methodology down here in SD County. I guess that is the way they deal with locked gates. Try to make it as difficult as you can for them. Great job. By the way, you posted some information on a FOIA request a few weeks ago. I didn’t copy it then and now I don’t remember where you posted it. Been very busy lately, but I do want to send a request in for information about my compliance checks, before I get sidetracked. It would be great if a group of us could submit these requests and find out what’s going on here. Could you post that again?

Someone had mentioned that CA had their own version of FOIA requests. That is true, but CA has no formal format guidelines for these requests, so going by the Federal format guidelines will work just fine. Except some CA law enforcement agencies (like Orange County Sheriffs) do have their own request forms that they prefer that you use (as someone had posted). Like the law says, they must notify you if they need additional information to process your request. However I would bet that they probably don’t even store this information.

This conversation is posted almost halfway down the page:

Thank you Lake County, much appreciate it.

How’s this for irony… I get an email from my kid’s school. They want me to fill out a survey. There’s a link to a survey online and the questions are of the type where they range from Very Much to Not At All and you click somewhere in between.

The second question is: “I feel welcome when I visit my child’s school.” Ha!!! If I was sure it was anonymous I’d be sure to select Not At All but I don’t want any chance that it can get back to me.

A question since I’m here anyway… This October 15 is the halfway point of my probation. I am definitely going to try for the felony reduction, expungement, and early termination. My question is this… how long does the process take and when can I start? Halloween being what it is for us here in California is there any chance I’d get it all done before then? Thanks!

JCM: what county are you in?

My attorney told me that it’s best to wait until you have completed 2/3 of your probation sentence. The law states you have to complete 1/2 before you apply. You would want to have all your fees and fines paid off, be done with counseling, no probation violations, and a thumbs up (or at least not a thumbs down) from your PO would be really helpful. I hired recordgone to do all of this for me…early term, reduction, & expungement. They did it all in one shot (court proceeding). After the reduction…I had to hire them to get me off the ML website since the DOJ did NOT do it automatically. In theory…a misdemeanor possession conviction isn’t supposed to be on the site. Since I started out with a felony…I ended up on the site after about 2 years. The county I was convicted in always dishes out felonies for CP…regardless of the details. It will likely take 2-4 months for the early term, reduction, etc. Then request removal from ML site. I have more info if you need it.

I did mine in Pro Per. Once the early termination was granted, the judge immediately set the next hearing for the reduction and expungement, which was about 30 days out. It was that fast.

It does make a difference what county you’re in. I was convicted in Orange County, but once adjudicated, I immediately move to San Francisco and had my entire case + probation transferred there. I know that had I stayed in OC, I probably would’ve been denied the motions. So winning my motions was grand on two different scales. 1: I won back my freedom (except the 290 part) and 2: It was a big middle finger to OC because they actually emailed the SF district attorney and recommended that my motions be denied. The judge sided with me. Take that T-Rack!

I was unable to participate in yesterday’s conference call about IML. If someone could provide a brief synopsis or, better yet, post the audio to that conference online, that would be terrific.

What I really want to know is if a new challenge is about to be filed and in what District and how it may differ from previous lawsuit.


Yes, challenge to the notices, preferably filed in LA. That’s what I heard.

For anyone that wants to challenge the entire Sex Offender registration scheme, this is a must read article:


You can easily replace the words “statutory mandatory minimum sentences” with “SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY and any laws written against those on it” and you’ve got numerous perfect arguments with referenced SCOTUS cases that demonstrate how the registry and all laws referencing it violate the separation of powers.

It’s a pretty quick read, so I recommend it to everyone. I especially like the part in section 301 (pg 17) that talks about Bill of Attainder.

There is WAY too much good stuff for me to copy and paste here, so please read it all, but here is a snippet:

Individual criminal defendants need to be protected against “the occasional
excesses of the popular will.” It is the duty of the judiciary to protect them
and to uphold our constitutional system of checks and balances that is “precise-
ly designed to inhibit swift and complete accomplishment of that popular

I forgot to mention, the quoted part at the end was by none other than Justice Scalia.

Mike R, you may find some great stuff in that article to use in your future challenge.

I wish I could challenge the registry myself, but since my situation is different than most it would never make it through the court system in time or be relevant to most people. I have only a year left, and my registry status was part of conditions and not mandated by law. That being said, I can’t leave my state or I’ll be put back on by other states, so I may have to challenge that after I am off the registry and it is “ripe” to challenge.

Found this old report (Sept 2007) and had to shake my head that for almost 10 years experts have been beating the drum in our favor, so far all for nothing.

Well guys. We gave it our all. Gorsuch is on the court. I guess we’re screwed. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow. But we’re screwed.

Not necessarily, Jack. Gorsuch is a far-sight better than many other candidates, Democrat or Republican, on individual liberties. He’s much better than Merrick Garland who Obama wanted to saddle us with. The fight against Gorsuch’s nomination was really pretty absurd given the vastly more awful things Trump is doing that the Democrats should be focusing on.

I’m not too concerned with Gorsuch. I listened to all of his confirmation hearings and I was mostly impressed by him. Yes, there are areas for concern, but Trump could have picked many other worse people for the job. But Justices that are picked often have surprised us once they are seated on the Supreme Court. You can never tell how someone will rule in that court until we start seeing some of their rulings. Our bigger concern may be that Trump will get to pick another Justice before his 4 years are up.

I’m not too concerned about Gorsuch, either. I think he’s actually pretty strong on civil liberties, so perhaps that will fall in our favor. I guess we’ll find out, as I’d bet dollars to doughnuts (mmm…doughnuts…) SCOTUS takes Snyder once they hear from the SG, and I would even venture they accept Werner v Wall for trial. IMHO, Werner v Wall is about a fundamental right (freedom once prison debt is paid) that these “non-punitive schemes” abridge, so would be subject to strict scrutiny. (Fingers crossed!)

Here’s an interesting item and outcome involving what was argued as an unconstitutional “mistake of age” statute ( Though only a District (County) Court level decision in Minnesota, it might still be a useful precedent or angle of attack for someone out there.

Here’s the write up from the attorney’s website:

Our client was charged with Felony Criminal Sexual Conduct and Possession of Child Pornography relating to sexual encounters with a 15-year-old. Our client believed (and had evidence of his belief) that the 15-year-old was really 16 (the age of consent in Minnesota). The law in Minnesota prohibits anyone more than 10 years older than the victim to raise the “mistake-of-age.” defense. Ryan and Elizabeth raised this issue before the district court, arguing that the law was unconstitutional that someone who was 10 years older than the victim could raise as a defense the mistake-of-age . . . but someone who was 11 years older could not. Our client was far older than the victim, but the same logic applied. The judge agreed and ruled that the defense could raise the mistake-of-age defense. The government dismissed the criminal sexual conduct charges and allowed to a lesser plea of guilty immediately prior to trial, a plea bargain that we were seeking since the case began.

So, I just had the pig probation department come knock on my door for the first time since I was released from county jail 7 YEARS AGO!!!

I am so pissed off.

Random probation do you live here check. **** 8 of them in my driveway and on my porch.

I was in my underwear, just got home from work, getting ready to get in the shower and my wife is cooking dinner.

She sees them all walk up and tells me as I’m in the hallway in my underwear.

I asked them through the window what’s this in regards to? And this **** says “open the door and I’ll tell you.” I said “no, tell me why you’re here. She’s says “open the door and I’ll tell you.” I said “no”

Then she says “we just want to make sure you live here.”

I threw the door open and said “yep! I do. My cars! My house!”

All of this while my 6 & 7 year old daughters are hanging out in my garage enjoying themselves.

The moment I opened the door they all started walking away before I could say anything else.

From a distance I screamed “so will I see you again in 5 years?”

Her response “randomly”

I will never open my door for these people again. EVER.

If anyone has a script I could use to let them know that I am aware of my legal rights and I’m not opening my door and they can go away please post for me!

Thank you, RC’s that are mostly all normal damn citizens!!!

I swear to god next time after this I invoke all of my rights and tell them to Lind **** sand and go away. I know my rights and the law. Register once a year. That’s it. NOT submit to address checks. **** them. The girls and zoey kept me from telling them to **** OFF

***While we agree with your sentiment, in the future please refrain from using certain 4-letter terms. Thank you. Moderator***

Would you mind giving the general area which you live? It would be helpful to have some idea which places are having these compliance checks.

Garden Grove, Ca.

@ JC
Try living in San Diego County. Every year a compliance check. 17 years after conviction. EVERY YEAR. You now know what it feels like to be constantly harassed. This should be addressed legally and I for one will throw my name inn the hat, but this time, I would like Janice to ask for damages in the settlement.
@Timmr, I am mailing out my request for ALL compliance checks performed at my residences by the county. Will call you later in the week.

Jeremy, are you currently on probation still? If so, I think you have to submit to whatever they ask of you. If you are not on probation you don’t have to open your door to them. My husband recently had a compliance check ( second one in 19 years) and we didn’t open the door. Fortunately we have a second story window overlooking the front porch that we opened and spoke directly to the police ( aptly while looking down on them!) If you choose to talk to them you don’t need a script- you just need to be calm, poised and convey to them that you are knowledgeable of the law ( or lack thereof). You could tell them that your property has audio video surveillance and you could ask them if they have reasonable suspicion to suspect that you have committed a crime. They are merely order followers with state issued weapons to intimidate- otherwise the police/ sheriffs departments would outsource these home compliance checks to a third party of professional looking people with cell phones and clipboards. Come to think of it- they would probably get a better result if they did.
We need to assert ourselves during these ridiculous random invasions .

Ask them for a badge and their business card before starting the conversation. If they cannot provide them, then don’t entertain them for their purposes. You need to know and have the right to know who they are and represent. Don’t take their word for it, even in uniform. Take a photo of both if you can, it is your right to do so, and them in uniform if you are able (you can do this just like you can video them and their interaction with you – they say you cannot, then reply you are within your rights to do so). Maybe install a security camera at your door to record these interactions. Get photos of the other officers and vehicles at this time with this person. You can challenge the alleged compliance people with the local LE office to ensure they are who they are saying they are. They are public servants and by the public record, they can be confirmed if they are who they say they are. Even the local LE auxiliary can be verified this way since they are acting as public servants and on behalf of the local LE office.

By the way, you can complete this compliance transaction through a screen door without opening it for them. They can read your license and a piece of mail through the screen door without having to touch it to confirm you are who you are and you live there.

Know your public rights of your property.

Jimmy Clark

First and foremost “Maintain Composure” that is to say Do Not let them see you sweat.

I suggest the following to you as I stated to Drummer.

And In addition read All of the Posts in the “March General Comments” section of this site to have a Full Understanding of the “Contexts” and there by placing you, and yours in a Stronger Position to Counter the attacks upon you by:

“Such public spectacle unfolding in a residential neighborhood that Has invariably entailed “A Large Degree of Public Opprobrium, Humiliation and Embarrassment for “The Righted & Entitled Citizen by The Creator in Heaven Most High, whether or not you, your wife, or children where present at the time of the Search and Intrusion for such “Dramatic Government Activity” in the eyes of many—Family Members, Friends, Associates, Neighbors, Sojourners, Enemies or Adversaries and the Public at Large— Was Viewed as “An Official Accusation of Crime or Forthcoming Indictment”. They have Violated your Rights & Titles under the Color of Authority.

“Son of Liberty Child of Freedom
March 19, 2017

I would suggest removing any Doorbells or Knockers and posting “No Trespassing” [“No Intrusions”]* signs at your Domicile as close to the property line as possible to clearly Give Notice to law enforcement officials [or Agents acting on the behalf of] & the public at large that there:

:Include the following on the Posted Sign:
1. Exist No Implied License or Permit to approach the front door of the Home.
2. Exist No Traditional Invitation or Permit to come upon the Property, Home, & it’s Curtilage or Homestall.

It would be to your & your beloved wife a Profit & Peace of Mind to Install a Video Surveillance System to document any violation of yours or your families Rights & Titles enumerated by The Constitution of the United States Of The American’s.

Should there be any violations by any Government Official or Agent on behalf then a Case can be filed to obtain a Court Order of Restraint upon the Wicked Servants.”

In addition I suggest working with your wife because she would make a stronger Advocate to your local public & neighbors as women & wife carry more weight the eye’s of the Community. Take the example of the Hebrew fellow Yeshua aka jesus would travel with all the women of his followers when entering a town during the 2nd. Temple Period.

I speak Truth

As Yehovah Lives, so should we

I apologize….I was furious. Feeling much better today lol 🙂

No offense was take JC.

Your outrage at the illicit conduct Under The Color of Authority is well founded and no Surprize.

Great to hear you are doing well today.

The Father Most High Be with you and yours and us all in this Match for Stolen Freedoms

As Yehovah Lives, so should we

Compliance checks like this are actually neighborhood notification schemes. Of course everyone in the neighborhood will ask, “Why the swarm of law enforcement.” Sex offender! It’s a sly method of getting around the notification laws and is especially bad if your address is not posted on the registry site. That is because the law requires your address not be published, and the police use this method to publish it in violation of the law. They need a good reason to do so, more than just a periodic compliance check.

Maybe as a form of minimal compliance it would be possible to get an ink pad and give them a thumbprint on paper and nothing else. Slide the paper out the door. Since they are violating the notification laws, you would not be breaking any laws by providing a thumb print for proof of identify. Make them work for it. (I’m assuming you are not on probation because they could have come in and searched the house if you were. Probation may have been there for those on probation.)

The 1st time they came to my house 4 yrs ago- I had no idea what a compliance check was. They actually parked their patrol car in my neighbors driveway! Then when I opened the door to them , they had the audacity to say to me ” can we come inside so your neighbors won’t see us here”. I laughingly said no, but as I was closing my front door to see if my husband was upstairs, one of the officers lunged towards me, stepped inside my house, put his hand firmly on the door preventing me from closing it and said, “leave your door open” . I said I have cats that will run outside into the street, asked him to step back out of my house and closed it anyways. Never again would I open my door to law enforcement unless I call them. Ever.

My husband is not listed either, most of my neighbors house are Air B&B s but I still think they engaged in misconduct.

The LEO crossed the threshold of the home? Illegal entry. Just remember, LEOs are like vampires: they feed on the innocent, can suck the life right out of you, and can only enter your home if invited. 🙂

Grabbed your arm? Definitely Battery, and quite possibly Assault and Battery. ( You justifiably had an immediate, well-founded fear of harm and indeed could have suffered injury from the grabbing and/or being pulled out the closing door. A complaint to the LE department, followed by a lawsuit against the department and city should have been your next steps.

And people wonder why there’s so much dislike for LEOs anymore. Like it or not, boys in blue, your bad apples poison all of you. Get them in line, out of work, or in jail. I don’t care, but get them out of uniform! Police your own.


Well, according to Federal Law, even a search of your home while on probation requires probable cause. I’ve read a lot of stories here about people on probation having to submit to all kinds of weird house searches, but is it legal in every instance? I’m not so sure.

(a) CONDITIONS OF PROBATION.—Section 3563(b) of title 18, United States
‘‘(23) A person, if required to register under the Sex Offender Reg­ istration and Notification Act, must submit his person, and any prop­erty, house, residence, vehicle, papers, computer, other elec­tronic communication or data storage devices or media, and effects to search at any time, with or without a warrant, by any law enforcement or probation officer with reasonable sus­picion concerning a violation of a condition of probation or unlawful conduct by the person, and by any probation officer in the lawful discharge of the officer’s supervision functions.’’

Well in this part of the sentence, it gives the probation department the right to search as part of their supervision functions.

“and by any probation officer in the lawful discharge of the officer’s supervision functions”

Also in many (if not most) cases the judge will just write “subject to search” as part of their probation.

The law pretty much says anyone on probation and subject to SORNA is open game if the PO or LEO have reasonable suspicion (or more) of a probation violation while on probation.
Outside probation, the standard rises almost to that of a non-RC…though that warrantless part raises some constitutional concerns.

Nondescript: It doesn’t say they have to have probable cause. It says reasonable suspicion of a probation violation or of unlawful conduct. Those are higher standards than probable cause. But then any LEO or PO can do it.

Lake County correctly points out that the PO has extra, broader authority as part of the supervision process that allows a visit at any time for any reason as long as it’s within the supervision rules, guidelines and procedures. He’s further correct in that it’s boilerplate language that a judge will issue “subject to search” as part of probation.


The pessimist in me has been having his day of late, giving me concern things will turn out poorly for us. It then occurred to me that perhaps we’re going about it all the wrong way. Instead of stopping the creep of the registry and its inane rules, maybe we should be pushing for wider expansion. The more trapped by it, the bigger an issue it will be. It may be easier to get it to collapse under its own weight than to try to get it to lose weight. Let’s nail the parents with felonies and registration when their kids sneak in and see their movies and magazines. Let’s force ANY citizen of ANY age to register for life for as many acts as possible. Two-year old ran out the door away from the babysitter trying to bathe him/her? Sorry babysitter, and kid, on the registry you go…for life. Oh and babysitter, you’re also in trouble for trafficking for letting others see a naked kid.

Given the historical “rational” scrutiny these things have gotten, they should all be legal…and non-punitive. C’mon, let’s get the whole country on registries!

Then, let’s also make it mandatory that LE do in-person compliance checks every 90 days on every RC. If it’s no inconvenience and good enough for scum like me, it’s good enough for them. Make it kind of like a watch-clock system for LE. 🙂 Missed one, officer? Sounds like you’re conspiring with a SO felon…that’s a felony. On the registry you go…for life.

Is my point ridiculous? Certainly, but it may end up being the only route if SCOTUS rules against us in Packingham, and possibly in Snyder.


No. Just….no.

Experience has proven that it is easy to get a law passed, and difficult to get it rescinded. Look at the city residency law process. Usually, 5 council creatures vote to enact an ordinance after giving and listening to countless horror stories. Then, it takes Janice to sue them before they rescind the laws, “relunctantly,” which takes months, all the while enforcing the law they passed in two minutes or less.

Multiply this scenario by ten or so, and registrants will be forced to live in tents in the middle of Death Valley before Janice can come to the rescue, based upon your strategy.


What it is also doing is unwisely spending tax dollars for defending the unconstitutional law in the first place at a later date when they knew it in the first place. Tax dollars are thin already, so if they go in knowing they will need to defend it with tax dollars later, they are taking the tax dollar away from something that really needs the attention. Pot holes? Meh, drive around them. Bad curbs and sidewalks? Meh, take a different way. Can turn on all of the street lights? Meh, don’t go outside there.

Regardless if the council legal counsel is already on payroll, there are better things to spend the money on. Some council’s realize that expense and drop it to avoid spending tax dollars on something proven already. Those who role the dice otherwise should have that issue raised during re-election season so the people can see how they are unwise when spending tax dollars.

My point was merely to flip the entire idiotic, useless process on its head and make an overwhelming majority of the populace–including city council creatures and LEOs–subject to registration as well. It was a tongue-in-cheek, sarcastic posting. But in all seriousness, if SCOTUS says everything is fine, what other tactic remains besides a scorched earth policy?


Hey everybody, I just read a 2012 article from Slate reporting on the percentage of students “physically” molested by their K-12 teachers: one report and two surveys discussed in the article. Turns out that the report says 6.7 percent of students, and the two surveys of adults came in at 3.7% and 4.1%. Shocking! The percentage of teachers committing sex crimes is so much higher than the reoffense rate for registrants. Who will join me in calling for all teachers everywhere to become registrants and be added to the Angel Watch notices so that those terrible “educators” are not allowed to travel to other countries and place children in danger?
Here is the article:

Hey, I just read this article from the New York Times from last year. Turns out that hundreds of police officers in Britain have been sexually attacking vulnerable people.
Shocking! Outrageous! We must do something to protect the vulnerable from these sexual perverts. Who will join me in calling for an international registry to be created for all police officers? We can’t allow those perverts from travelling to other countries and abusing their authority. We should put a mark in their passports and send notices to any countries they might want to visit.

Hey, everybody. It occurs to me that maybe we have been going about improving our situation in the wrong way. We keep trying to use empirical evidence to show that the dangers of reoffense don’t justify a registry. You and I understand this, but others don’t want to hear it. I once heard that the best way to refute absurdity is with absurdity. So maybe we should just present the higher odds of being sexually abused by a teacher or a police officer in our favor. Let’s get everybody registered and prevent their travel.

California registrant here not on parole/probation looking to rent a place and unsure about the restrictions. Is it still the state law of 2000 ft from park/school/daycare? I read somewhere that the 2000 ft restriction was lifted except for city ordinances, but I’m really unsure about it. Any clarification is appreciated, thanks!

If you’re not on parole/probation then the State of CA has no residency restrictions. Some cities do have residency restrictions, but they have been found unconstitutional and Janice has been actively and successfully getting cities to remove them through lawsuits. If you are wondering about a particular city, just send Janice a message through the contact link at the top of this page. I think that most of the cities that had/have restrictions are located in Southern CA. I don’t think this has been an issue in Northern CA.

Thanks Lake County!
Is there a source for this? I’ve always been told there was restriction after parole/probation so I’m wondering when it changed

I’ve lived near a school since my conviction almost 20 yrs ago. Was never an issue. There are restrictions while on parole/probation if they require it from you. Not sure if it was ever mandatory throughout the State. Like I said before, some cities did have mandatory restrictions during and after parole/probation, but most no longer have restrictions. Maybe that’s what you heard about?

Trop v. Dulles
356 U.S. 86 (1958)

2. Even if citizenship could be divested in the exercise of some governmental power, § 401(g) violates the Eighth Amendment, because it is penal in nature and prescribes a “cruel and unusual” punishment. Pp. 356 U. S. 93-104.

Might be worth looking at.

Was there a recent conference call regarding the IML?

This man needs our help. His name is Todd Nickerson, and I swear if the dislikes on this video outnumber the likes it means a win for the neo nazis who are advocating genocide against us. This cannot be tolerated, and you all must rise to the occasion and rush to this man’s aid as I have. The hour is very late.

Nope. Sorry. Pedophilia is repulsive.
Good on him that he hasn’t acted out on his feelings (thus preventing life on the registry), but this man needs psychological help.

@ NPS, and how exactly is he going to get it with an attitude like the one you have? Tell me, do you think a person should be for their thoughts alone? I have to say I find your position incredible given your predicament.

He doesn’t even know I exist. So what difference does my attitude make? Am I wrong to believe that pedophilia is disgusting? I STAND BY MY ORIGINAL COMMENT.

And you know my predicament how? Aside from being a registered citizen? I’m not on a public registry (nor was I ever) and my conviction is expunged. Police or the public don’t bother me because they know I’m zero risk. Ironically, it’s other RCs who seem to be my biggest critics, but I take it with a grain of salt. I’ll still continue to write letters and make phone calls to Sacramento. I have a strong support network of family and friends. I’ve worked hard to get where I am today. I have an MA degree and will move on to my Ph.D. I have a career, and I am a homeowner. And I’ll continue to be successful in spite of 290. You SHOULD find my position incredible.

It matters in the court of public opinion. That’s why your attitude makes a difference.

I’m sorry – new here – what is a Registered Citizen (RC)?

A registered citizen is a person who has to still register after they have completed probation or parole.

Thank you. How does that differ from Registered Sex Offender? Just another way of saying it?

Mike G

The derogatory term “Registered Sex Offender” is a insult and has been Pejoratized. We know this because it is applied to a overly broad subject.

I personally elect Not to take Offense when reading or hearing the term as “Taking Offence” is the Intended Pupose of the term Being “Pejoratized” by those who seek vengeance.

When a Person is Easily Offended it demonstrates & is Evidence that they erroneously utilize “Intuitive Judgment” when they should correctly utilize “Probability Judgment”


Because if one elects Not to be offended then the person can now use The Oppertunity at Hand to speak & educate in conjunction with Critical Thinking* Skills on the Base Rates of the Issues, there by effectively Countering the Attack on a Minority Class & the innocent family members who suffer UnJustly with them.

expressing contempt or disapproval.
“”permissiveness” is used almost universally as a pejorative term”
synonyms: disparaging, derogatory, denigratory, deprecatory, defamatory, slanderous, libelous, abusive, insulting, slighting; informalbitchy
“his remarks were considered too pejorative for daytime radio”
a word expressing contempt or disapproval.



In the term critical thinking, the word critical, (Grk. κριτικός = kritikos = “critic”) derives from the word critic and implies a critique; it identifies the intellectual capacity and the means “of judging”, “of judgement”, “for judging”, and of being “able to discern”.

I speak Truth

As Yehovah Lives, so should we

Thank you!

Mike G –

Registered Citizen = Registered Sex Offender

They are synonymous but RC is the more dignified preferred term and not pejorative as noted, but is another way of saying it

Make sense?

Thanks! That clears it up for me.


It’s great you have so much support. Really. Many of us don’t have that.

BTW, I’m like you. Never was on the list. Expunged as well. Except, where I live, I’m still treated like a monster. I don’t share your plethora of positive support. I wished I did have some, but I don’t. I’m sure many of us don’t.

I’m just beat down. Regardless, I’m happy for you. I’m happy for all who find happiness. I have to force myself to not be depressed. Having positive support and hope matters tremendously mentally.

NPS, I’m not sure why your owning a home or having a post-grad degree or having so many friends should make a difference in your relative value here. As a matter-of-fact, I’m also a homeowner (a two-unit duplex in San Francisco on a hilltop in a great neighborhood) with a postgraduate education, as well. I don’t have all that many friends as once I did, however. But none of that should make any difference to anyone at all. Certainly not here where quality of life is something denied to so many on the Registry. What you’re really trying to do is to make a statement that you hope others will respect about your worth as a human being and making it eminently clear that you’re not to be confused with a “repulsive” pedophile. You obviously need someone you can look down upon.

What you’re really managing to do is to display your ignorance and callousness about a complex subject which is so poorly understood that it has resulted in the human rights travesty which is the subject of this forum and organization. So, despite your education, you manage to be a bigot and an hysteric. That should not be a source of pride.

I’m with u nps and I am also happy to hear ur living life in spite of the system trying to ruin ur life. U make us all look just a little bit more decent. Thanks

Be assured, NPS, that many of us find YOU repulsive, too.

That’s quite all right, David. I accept that. I also accept that far more people who know me personally admire my strength and resilience.

I agree with you NPS. But its probably not a good idea to cause animosity in a sex offender group, we have zero outside help and the inner membership is fractured at best. Remember most people here actually committed a crime. We can argue whether or not it deserves the punishment the registry causes but that doesn’t take away from the fact there are bound to be some actual pedophiles in this group. It’s part of the reason I’m torn with ACSOL. Last year I was whole heartedly in support of marginalizing sex offenders. Since being falsely accused and scared into taking a misdemeanor plea, I’ve been forced to associate myself to with these folks. Its a Love-hate relationship :p

It’s not a “fractured membership” until someone “fractures” it. Keep in mind that “pedophiles” have contributed greatly to this organization as well as to RSOL, its forerunner, and you are benefiting from their efforts. One would be wise not to malign them while simultaneously relying upon them.


It’s long been fractured and on several levels. There has always been an “us vs. them” mentality such as:

contact vs. non-contact offenses
prepubescent child related vs. post-pubescent/adult related
publicly listed vs. non-publicly listed
having a record vs. expunged record

As long as RCs are all painted with the same brush, we will always have this fracturing because people don’t want to be associated with certain types of offenses. That’s just how it is.

Now with regards to pedophilia, I will continue to stand up and say that it’s disgusting. It’s a very hot button issue for me at the moment because my cousin informed me last autumn that her father-in-law had been sexually molesting her 10-year-old daughter and grooming her 8-year-old daughter. Ironic that the one person she trusts and confides in most to help her through this ordeal is the RC. Of course, she has always been supportive of me, too. His trial is next month. So whenever I hear someone try to garner sympathy for a pedophile. I can’t do it.

NPS what is your definition of a pedophile?

Well, judging by what NPS wrote, a pedophile is someone who has an offense on a pre-pubescent child.

I just say this because of her story concerning a 10 year old.

I’m not looking for any sympathy, but I would appreciate a little understanding. I am happy that you have good support from family and friends, and that people admire your strength and resilience. I could say some of that for myself, but maybe not with your credentials.
I think any act that harms a child, physically or sexually, is abominable. No one who knows what I did 23 years ago (and there are quite a few) thinks that I harmed a child (many were surprised, as I was, that I was even charged), but the prosecutor felt he had a case, and I pled no-contest to avoid children having to testify in court. Had I had any idea how things would change from then to now, I would have fought the charges tooth and nail. At the time, 30 days in jail, 200 days on an ankle bracelet, 5 years probation, and not having to register, seemed like a pretty good deal. But of course, not everything I was promised stayed the same, and its only gotten worse since then (as we all know).
Personally, I think homosexuality is disgusting; not the people, just the acts (I know, I know, consenting adults perfectly legal, etc.).
Do you think those who identify as homosexuals choose to be that way, or were they born that way, or did something happen in their childhood?
Same question for pedophiles. Do think that I chose to be attracted to children? I certainly did not, and I wish I wasn’t. I don’t know if I was born with those tendencies, or if something happened when I was a child.
I am happily married, 40 years in November, three kids, first grandchild on the way (finally), and overall my life was going pretty well until the International Megan’s Law happened. After traveling around China, Egypt, Italy, and taking several Caribbean cruises, we finally set off on our 3 week excursion to Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, and Burma, including meeting my wife’s family for the first time. Unfortunately, the authorities were waiting for me at the off ramp, and all I saw of Thailand was the inside of the airport. My wife decided to return with me, and we took a Hawaii cruise for consolation.
But I digress. Don’t need your sympathy, but pedophiles are people too, and though we love children, few of us (I hope) would actually hurt one.

Nobody is “forcing” you to do anything.

He is apparently brave and honest. How many who are for the registry are themselves secretly attracted to children? Those I would fear. This guy, not.

Regarding the recent teleconference on IML, my comments:

The question from Todd as to whether Registrants have fewer rights when their electronics are being searched at the border should be directed to a ruling several years ago which SPECIFICALLY EXCEPTED Registrants from protections against such searches. Sorry, I don’t have it before me but it was very much a news item several years ago. Chance was right that rights protecting us against border searches were far fewer than non-border searches but, at least one federal judge decided that searches of electronics by Customs were not given a blank check EXCEPT if the traveler was a sex offender. So I would have to disagree with Chance when he said that the sex offender status of a traveler is not “probable cause.” The judge specifically said that it is.

Also, and regarding Todd’s friend who was turned away at from the Dominican Republic having NOT given 21 Day Advance Notice, there is one other explanation not proffered by either Janice or Chance and that is that INTERPOL has us in their database (they have said so, after all) and it was this database which alerted Customs to his presence and gave them the opportunity to refuse him at the border.

Advance notice or not, there is that other mechanism, i.e. the INTERPOL database which is being used increasingly by customs officials worldwide, that foreign governments can rely upon that can prevent us from traveling. I’m not quite sure why this explanation is still eluding us. This must be part of any lawsuit against IML going forward especially since INTERPOL has stated that each country has full authority over what information about its citizens is made available through its network.

Yes, thank you for uploading the conference call. I’m glad that one of the callers brought up the subject of providing an itinerary of travel plans in regards to international travel. I have seen the itinerary questions and they are quite intrusive. Where you are staying, who you are traveling with ( names , dates purpose of travel etc) I know that the Federal guidelines require SORNA States to demand the 21 day notice but where is it codified in Federal law that this additional information must be given? Travel plans are sometimes fluid. I have often changed hotels once i’m abroad, decided to see another city that wasn’t in my original travel plans, and hopped on a Eurorail train with no idea where I’d end up at the end of the day. People do these kinds of things when they travel to a foreign destination to explore!
What kinds of punitive penalties await us when we arrive back home if we didn’t stick to our itinerary?

Having to get a travel permit, or provide notification, to leave a certain jurisdiction is a characteristic of criminal supervision – parole or probation. Even on parole or probation, failure to get permission(!) to travel is a probation / parole violation – NOT a brand new felony worth 10 years in prison. Most likely more than the possible sentence for the underlying offense ever was. That, right off the bat, shows it is punitive.

The notification requirement criminalizes spontaneous travel. IML contains no language concerning short term trips, or a change in itinerary. Thus it DOES absolutely restrict a person’s – who is not on parole or probation – free movement. I have no idea how that can be constitutional.

It absolutely does criminalize spontaneous travel. They would argue however, that a registrant does not need “permission” to travel. You are at liberty to go wherever you want but you have to tell us all about it before you go. This is compelled disclosure and a 1st amendment violation. The courts have already ruled that compelled disclosure must be narrowly tailored to a specific and paramount government interest. The government has no real vested interest in knowing in advance what hotel or private residence we stay at in another country .

Nondescript, good point. And I would like to know what “specific and paramount government interest” the US Government has in another country. Though it may be “neighborly” to advise Honduras, Albania, Thailand, Rwanda, or wherever, that a “bad person” is headed their way, I still struggle to find how it reaches the legal standard.

Another risk introduced by the whole advance notice and itinerary issue is that it may well subject one to violating both U.S. and foreign laws. U.S. for the change without the 21 days, and perhaps foreign for similar “elusive” activities. The risk of imprisonment for exercising freedom of movement by any sort of impromptu travel change is well beyond regulatory.

I gotta think, based on the chinks in the domestic ML armor that are starting to show, some reasonable judge will strike down IML…if the case can ever see light of day in a courtroom.


Upton Sinclair once said “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

To those who man a typewriter, telephone, or computer while harnessing brain power and your voice, we salute you and thank you as you with the hard effort you put forth to try to get those who need to understand and don’t understand. It could be here on this website, the other ones that are similar, or just writers who truly understand the messed up nature of our country in this area.

Hitting the human in the pocketbook is the second hardest place to hit them as seen in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs where Safety (economic safety is one area) is the second most needed need to be met (after air, water and food which is first). Once someone has been hit enough there, they may understand, hopefully, the realization of their shortsightedness. That is the goal at least.

You know people profit off of the misery of others and by doing what you do to combat those who do profit, whether it is through politics or afterward, you are doing the right thing. Whether you’re a financial supporter here, a written word contributor, a fighter of your own plight who shares your knowledge with others or a professional who takes on the cause for those who need you, many thanks and keep pressing on with the good fight! Your work goes beyond the CA borders and really is a national impact.

@Well Done

A well written missive. I concur. For a long time I hid in the shadows, gaining insight from other posters sharing of their research and experiences- Then the States order followers came banging on MY door. I think I reached a threshold, and realized that fear was my true enemy and captor. I have an esoteric bent so it was not difficult to turn my mindset around and am glad I did. There’s not much left to do but join the cavalry in the fight against this evil perpetrated against registrants and their families. Your past is just that- a series of choices, some good, some bad, and lessons learned along the way. No one is even the same person they were 7 years ago, as our atoms have arranged and rearranged so my times, but belief systems that have been foisted upon us seem to stick. Allowing shame to overcome you is the worst thing a person can do to themselves- it truly WEAKENS you and holds you in fear.

We are all mavericks. As those in eras before us. I am not a religious person at all but these words are truer esoterically than most will ever realize-

“For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places”

Those hosts must be exposed. I too thank all that are involved in spearheading this website, those that opine and the attorneys and others who have devoted their professional lives to this purpose.

Nondescript thank you for your courage, may it spread to all who read of your strength.

“Then the States Order followers came banging on MY door. I think I reached a threshold, and realized that Fear was my true enemy and captor.”

I am filled (bara / blessed) to know you came to a threshold and Opened Your Eyes to see clearly the Barrier (ha satan) laid upon your path in life. These Accusers who steal men, women, & children must be confronted as Moses confronted the egyptian empire in a three fold way, physically, orally, and spiritually with calling out to The Most High.

In this Match everything counts, that is to say No Holds Barded. This Match is for Liberty & Freedom which was already Hard Fought For by our Founding Fathers as far back as Moses. It involves protecting the Innocent family members who UnJustly suffer with their Repentant Law Abiding Loved one.

The Father Most High Guard us all so that evil ( Want ) may pass over us.

As Yehovah Lives, so should we

I just registered in OC. Much more organized! Few changes. The forms where pre printed and they seemed to focus on an alternative address and what cars you drive? They request a vin? I just bring my registration with me. What if you own 5 cars? I don’t even remember my own license plate #? Unlike ever before, they printed a page with license plate #’s and car makes of my prior cars? I couldn’t even recall? The clerk stated put yes or no? On one, I put not sure? Do we really have to sign this? Plus, what if my wife owns 2 other cars I don’t drive?

USA, I am a wife and I own two vehicles and my husband owns two. When I asked your question of the federal probation officer and his supervisor, they asked me if I kept the keys in the house. Well, of course I do.
The reply was, “If the keys are in the house then he has access and they must be reported.” I wonder if the answer would have been different if I had said, ” No, I just leave the keys in the vehicles.” ???

Margaret – I don’t think they are correct when they say any accessible car has to be reported. They will tell you though. They make up a bunch of bs but if you are still on probation it might be best not to argue for now. Read the po stipulations and if it is not mentioned a judge would have to modify to include that. He has access to a taxi or a bus too. Should that be registered too? In any case I don’t know what your rules are but I am almost certain they made that bs up.

@ Margaret Moon (Yerach)‘

Have you confirmed what they said to you was True in accordance with the Law of the land?

Keep in mind always that these Government Agents are Not required by the SCOTUS to tell you the Truth, meaning they Are permitted by the Law of the land to Misguide You, in order to gather Information in their Duty to conduct a criminal investigation With or Without Probable Cause. That is what they get paid to do, All Day, Every Day, Year End Year Out, & Year to Date, In a Complete Linear Fashion Non-Stop.
(only under a Oath in a court proceeding must LE speak Truth) but even then as they are human Beings they may Not be forthcoming but Misleading in the Court, that’s a Fact.

With the end purpose to Accuse You in any Court of Law and a Final Out Come where You the Wife of the Registered Person are now Punished and marked as a Criminal.

This Unstated Goal by LE, can now be used to Justify their Evil (Want Creating Ways) in a two fold way:

1: Outwardly to the Public at Large, a Justification for their Daily Bread- that’s you.
2: Internalized Psychologically for their own ConScience, that is to say:
“When they look into the mirror!”

History has demonstrated this to Be Truth. For example we can look back in hindsight at the Actions of the Nazi Party members, followers & supporters who attempted to annihilate the Hebrew people. We can now take note how the German people in General have a self defeating attitude with respect to being accused of racism, so much so that they allow themselves to be abused & demonstrate Self-Loathing behavior because of their Human Errors of the past. This is the position that LE & those who charged them with this Duty is Sub-consciously attempting to avoid in Order to feel secure in life and sleep at night in the Darkness where Silence resides and Is the Domicile of Truth.

That being said what can we now Correctly Infer with regard to your personal situation & all those who find themselves in the same position.

Let us ask:

1: Is it possible now that you have volunteered your personal vehicle details & your personal Accounting of your daily whereabouts, will you now be a target for a police patrol officer if by simple chance they investigate your cars license plate during their daily patrols of the streets.

2: Is it possible that your information that the government now has will in the Future be used or sold Under a New law that is passed against those Registered Persons & those in Guilt by Association, which we Do Not Know of or Could Not Know of to further Punish and is there any Possibility of this in the future to occur ?

What are the Probabilities of these or other out-comes which we can Not ForeSee ?

Keep in mind life is Uncertain, there are No assurance, of No end of Surprizes. That is why I suggest controlling your Data & Information, it Is your Property!

The Write to Remain Silent is a Great Stone upon which The Constitution of The United States Of The American’s is built on.

It is a Risk to speak to Government Agents, be very careful what you say Not matter how trivial the information you may think the information to be, please keep in mind that they (in particular detectives) are Trained to build One-Way False Rapport^ with you, in order to give you the False Sense of Security & lower your inhibition to give them very valuable information that from your hopes & perspective at the time you see as having no Value, remember they are Not payed to be your friends.

That is “The Simple Ugly Truth!”

It gives no pleasure to say these things but they must be said! , for the Paths into the desert are fraught with Sons of Serpents & Children of Vipers who lay in wait for The Children of Dust for they despise Dust (HaAdam).

The Only Father Most High Possessor of Heaven & Earth Who Formed the Light & created Darkness Be with us always & Be a Light upon our paths, we pray for relief.

As Yehovah Lives, so should we

Another school shooting, this one out in San Bernardino, a teacher’s estranged husband shows up and kills her, an 8 year old boy and critically wounds at least one more before doing the world a favor and taking himself out. What an effing POS this guy. I get so angry at this news, but as I hate to make this terribly tragic story about us, I get even angrier to think the government is trying to restrict registered citizens from participating in our children’s education when the vast overwhelming number of crimes against children on campus are committed by faculty and staff.

How odd that Senator Leyva’s SB26 “Keeping Kids Safe at School” does absolutely nothing to address those convicted of domestic violence*, gun law violations*, etc.
*The SB school shooter had convictions for both.
Cowardly politicians are always happy to pick on the reviled and underrepresented, but are scared to death of opposing any real foes (especially if it relates in any way to our precious guns)**.
** Clearly viewed as more precious than children.

Just another piece of information from my visit to the local police station. As I was waiting, a gentleman walked in to provide information on a new vehicle he just got, and he said he thought he had five days to report this. The lady at the front desk told him, and I witnessed this, that he is not required to provide this information other than at his annual registration. This is in Orange County, CA. Just FYI.

I would NOT set that in stone. Interpreting the various laws probably vary from person to person, let alone department, and if someone comes to a different person behind that desk, he may get a different answer. That seems to be a common theme not just in California, but also nationwide.

Quite right. In San Diego County I was told I have two weeks to show proof of new vehicle ownership. I have been told different versions about having to notify them when I go on vacation, five days, two weeks, last was 10 business days. The business days count as being the days when the registering office is open, that being Monday through Thursday, four days a calendar week. I think they make it up as they go along. I think the main point is to have a reason to arrest you on something if they desire. We have special amorphous crimes design especially to make it more likely we end up in prison.

Maybe next time, ask them “Is that the legal requirement? Could you provide me with the statute number?”

There is no statute number. The reference number is Smith versus Doe. There are different methods of achieving the basic regulatory goal of making our lives miserable. They therefore interpret it much like regulating water in a drought, each jurisdiction is free to some extent to use its own methods. That is why lawyers don’t wish to fight this.

Timmr, I would ask for a copy of the rule/regulation/statute from them for your own personal reference. “You know, I have such a hard time recalling the rules and stuff, and I’m not very good at using a computer. Would you be so kind as to provide me a copy that I may keep and use for reference? It’d be especially helpful when I have a ‘senior moment’ and your office is closed. I would really, really appreciate your help.” Then smile and wait.

Then once it’s in hand and I’m out the door, I would notate on there the time and date I received it, and from whom. “Received from Marge S., at window 3 of the DPS, on April 12, 2017 at 1:42 PM.” And if good old Marge declines or is unable to supply the docs for you, make a notation about that in a running journal saying so.

Though it may seem it won’t hold any water, if you’ve developed a system of records, where you log events and keep documents, it can go a long way with a judge if things go south. That’s why I keep records of my visits (including any variance from law or previous experience the clerk does or says), receipts, scans of my expired ID card, etc. (Don’t tell anyone, but nobody stops to consider that one might be capturing an audio recording via their cell phone that’s innocently held in one’s hand…or, so I’ve been told. 😉 )

Paperwork and documentation never matters…until it does.


That sounds completely reasonable compared to anything registrants go through. Let’s break this down:

“Lawmakers in the state passed a bill late Monday that would allow judges to order that defendants wear GPS devices connected to “victim stay-away alert technology” as a condition of pretrial release or probation”

1) A Judge has discretion to order it or not, and the defendant has full access to attorneys and the appeals process if it isn’t fair. They didn’t create a completely separate system like the registry that removed judges discretion from the process entirely.

2) It is only as a condition of pre-trial release and probation, not lifetime or after probation is over.

3) It is narrowly tailored to the benefit of the specific victim (or victims) and not publicly listed or banished to affect their ability to work or live almost anywhere they want to.

Sounds fine to me.

@ Chris F, I agree. It sounds quite appropriate. But let’s strike #1, 2 and 3, thereby, making it mandatory & lifetime for all (because DVers really do have a higher recidivism rate). Oh, and put all their info and pics online too! That way, let the DVers fight all the legal battles and registered citizens will be able to ride to freedom on the coattails of the DVers’ inevitable legal successes!! 😁

That’s it….let’s just get everyone on some sort of registry and/or monitoring and the whole world will be safer. Then lets put a prominent marker on their passports, as they’re increased risk for that. Had a few DUIs? Maybe too many speeding tickets? “DRUNK” or “LEAD FOOT” on your passport, as you’re a higher risk of vehicular homicide. Larceny? “BURGLAR”, as you’re more likely to want to steal something. Been arrested during a protest? “SEDITIONIST” for you, as you’re more likely to stir up trouble in the streets.

Wife beater, dog abuser, murderer, nose picker, political opponent, etc, etc, let’s get a list for all!

Martin Niemoeller had it right many years back:


Supremacy Clause

I found this old article written on the Huffington Post in 2014. Here’s what is written about the Supremacy Clause:

The law that applies to situations where state and federal laws disagree is called the supremacy clause, which is part of article VI of the Constitution. The supremacy clause contains what’s known as the doctrine of pre-emption, which says that the federal government wins in the case of conflicting legislation. Basically, if a federal and state law contradict, then when you’re in the state you can follow the state law, but the feds can decide to stop you. When there is a conflict between a state law and federal law, it is the federal law that prevails. For example, if a federal regulation prohibits the use of medical marijuana, but a state regulation allows it, the federal law prevails.


The current registration laws in California supersede what the SCOTUS defined as registration such as:
1) Only convictions are on the registry b/c they are public record
2) No restrictions on travel, live, employment, etc…
3) No in-person annual registration, as this was stated as a specific example of punishment in the legal documents in the 2003 Smith Decision.
4) Registration length should be tailored to the individual’s conviction.

CA Laws that supersede Federal law:
1) Anyone with their case dismissed is forced to remain on the registry
2) There are employment restrictions. (Recently, living restrictions were lifted, but travel concerns matter as you have to report to the local LE as if you were still on probation. Also, this banishment on school grounds is also a form of restricting travel.)
3) Every registrant in CA is forced to do an in-person registration. SCOTUS denoted this is punishment as you are still serving the state in that capacity as well as be humiliated by going in person. Compelled service of a free person is prohibited unless it is to punish a crime. So compelled service is either Involuntary Servitude or Slavery. You get paid for involuntary servitude. You don’t get paid if you’re a slave.
4) Every registrant in CA is given a lifetime registration. Registration length is not individualized via conviction. First time offender or multiple time offender or varying degrees of offense means nothing as everyone convicted of a sex crime is on the lifetime registration.

I’m curious. What was the legality on winning living and presence restrictions? I wonder if it has to do with supremacy clause? Can we use supremacy clause in California, especially denoting that in-person registration is punishment – something that CA cannot refute as it was a specific example of what is punishment in the 2003 Smith decision. Can we use the supremacy clause v California for those of us who’s convictions have been dismissed, and therefore no longer public record. 2003 Smith decision specifically states only “convictions” are to be on the registry.

So… Supremacy clause… anyone else want to look into this as well as see if I’m onto something? I wonder if Mike R. introduced the supremacy clause in his legal paperwork?



Here’s why:
In trying to educate myself the past couple years about why my life is the way it is, I’ve become a big reader. But the past 4 months or so I’ve been watching documentaries. We cancelled dish and began streaming Netflix through the internet. Two movies have made me want to remove all the money I can from the government: Requiem for the American Dream & Inside Job. Everyone here should watch those two movies by any means possible. Here’s the message I got from them. The rich & powerful take our $, whether paid taxes or bank deposits or insurance deposits, etc & use it against you. Watch the movies. They will explain in detail much better than I can why we should be keeping our wages in our possession & reducing, & if possible, eliminating our taxes. If we remove the finances for them to use against us, they won’t be able to use it against us. Use these documentaries as tools to educate everyone you know. THIS IS A WAKE UP CALL FOR AMERICA!! GET UP NEXT TIME THAT SNOOZE ALARM GOES OFF BECAUSE WHILE YOU’RE SLEEPING IN YOUR COMFY BED YOUR GOVERNMENT IS SCREWING YOU OVER!!!!!!!

I don’t use banks, they can be too expensive and that money can be legally taken from you. I put my money in Bitcoins. It’s a world wide currency that cannot be controlled by the banking industry or any government. It is anonymous and has no currency exchange costs if you travel. It has been around for about 7 years and is quite stable now. In fact lately my money has doubled in the last 6 months since it’s value increases as it’s popularity increases. The Federal Reserve and other countries can print more money, but you can’t print more Bitcoins. Several countries now encourage it’s use, as their own country’s currency is too unstable. It’s too complicated to explain in this forum how this currency works, but you can Google it if you’re interested in learning more.

California has issues! I can’t even believe we have people who remain on the registry with misdemeanor expunged offenses/summary probation? I register in OC via clerks and they really aren’t to aware of the laws? I ask questions and they don’t seem to know? I wasn’t even aware that I’m supposed to inform them when I take a trip? Who do I call? They could lie? Forget? Who knows?

Now, we have legislators pushing for new laws that push for increased or harsher rules when or if you visit a school campus? Yet, we have had numerous school shootings and I can’t remember how many teachers I’ve seen arrested for underage sexual contact with students (most have been women instructors)? Very sad. I truly feel badly for the proponent of this law. She is clearly not that educated and doesn’t seem to look st the big picture. Very, very sad. We should be focusing upon rehabilitating those who make mistakes and focus on rehabilitating the registry so that it can reduce a number of individuals who remain and have long past been rehabilitated and no longer pose any threat to anyone 🙃

Anonymous Nobody did enlighten us on how the state of California removed being taken off the registry from 1203.4.

But here’s the kicker… I noted the Supremacy Clause above. The 2003 decision only noted convictions to the open public. This implies dismissed convictions should not be subject to the registry… but here we are with dismissed cases that no longer are privy to the public, but are still a part of the regulatory scheme. Recall, Federal trumps State laws. So why not push for the fact that:

a) according to the 2003 decision, only convictions are subject to the registry
b) in California, its citizens have an inalienable right to pursue and obtain privacy. The negation of regaining said privacy from 1203.4 should bring about a civil suit. Even a person gets their gun rights back when their felony changes to a misdemeanor.

You have an interesting point.

I wasn’t aware that notification is to be given to take a domestic vacation either? I thought that as long as you notified each state of your presence according to their individual state laws, you were ok? Where can I find out more about this?

There is no California 290 law regarding notification of domestic travel ( at least I can’t find one)

There is a SORNA law that requires anyone who is required to register to notify their jurisdiction if they intend to temporarily reside at any place other than his or her residence for more than 7 days ( i.e. A vacation)

I notice that some States have taken this even farther and codified it into their nonsense sex offense laws to make it 3 days. These are mostly SORNA States.

A registration detective in Los Angeles once told my husband when he inquired about traveling, vacations etc that he could go anywhere he wanted to for 14 days. Anything beyond 14 days, and he should consider himself absconded without some kind of notification to them. ( this was 5 years ago or so- before IML)

Can you please cite the section of the SORNA law that says if you are staying somewhere 7 or more days other than your residence you must notify your jurisdiction?

This is 2016 review of California implementation of SORNA. Page 6 – Temporary Lodging Information ( leaving the jurisdiction for 7 days or more)
Note the citation (10) at bottom of page says while California does not capture lodging information, some agencies ( registration offices) capture this information by the registrants own consent

“10 Some agencies currently capture this with the consent of the registrant.” This is how they frame the request for “consent” in my jurisdiction. They told me if I left more more than 14 days (the rule 5 years ago) or now 5 business days (this year’s rule), they could do a compliance check while I am gone, and making no contact after several days, assume I have absconded. So if you don’t consent to let them know when you are taking temporary lodging somewhere, they threaten to put a warrant out for you. I am beginning to see the game played here. Well go ahead Mr. Law enforcer, just do that.

So what you’re telling me is you’re under supervision 24/7? Isn’t that a trait of being on probation?

Bc if there is no other cause to come to your house, then there is no need to do a compliance check. Remember, just because you don’t answer the door does not mean you aren’t there. So it may seem the LEO are “jumping to conclusions” without real facts.

I am also questioning the legality of polygraphs. Most probationers have to sign a court order, stating that they waive their 4th amendment rights regarding search and seizure. Where does it say, though, they are also waiving their 5th amendment right to self incrimination? Should that not also be in the court order if required?

Review the 10th Circuit Court ruling on this topic.

Thanks AJ for posting that link to the 10th Circuit ruling (of which Justice Gorsuch was part of)

Gorsuch was part of the 10th at the time, but was not one of the three judges who decided this case. That said, I think he would have decided the same.

I haven’t given them any cause, ‘cept going about my business, obeying what rules I know of. Probation was over 12 years ago. This is now illegitimate. What they are jumping at is overtime pay. Like you have been fathfully repeating– thank goodness we are finally saying it– we are serving their wishes involuntarily. If the media would start reporting it from this angle, the practice would be over next month. Liberal media, conservative media, we’re the invisible men and women to them. What they see are figments of the imagination, fake news, mirages, cartoon nightmares, individuals separate, without loved ones, dreams, aspiration like everyone else. There should be a way to take advantage of that. They won’t see what’s coming and plan for it. Too cavalier for their own good. They have stop and frisk, knock and talk, hands up don’t shoot, dragging and bloodying peaceful passengers off airplains. They need us and compliance checks to gain points in a public relations war they are loosing. They have an advocate now in the White House. That’s like having a top deck luxury cabin on the Titanic.

Timmr – Good point!

They seem to forget the root of the word “assume” because it is not probable cause to assume you have absconded when you return to your residence and not truly absconded after you return.

Abscond – West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved, (

To go in a clandestine manner out of the jurisdiction of the courts, or to lie concealed, in order to avoid their process. To hide, conceal, or absent oneself clandestinely, with the intent to avoid legal process. To postpone limitations. To flee from arresting or prosecuting officers of the state.

Abscond – Collins Dictionary of Law © W.J. Stewart, 2006, (

To run away, especially from the jurisdiction of a court. It may be an offence in its own right as where the absconder is on BAIL and fails to surrender to custody or tries to escape the consequences of insolvency.

By definition, you must not leave in public manner, but in a clandestine or concealed manner, e.g. wearing a disguise, in a box with breathing holes, etc, from the jurisdiction of the court, even when no longer under the eye of the court, e.g. SORNA law definition as discussed here, or just to leave the local area for a short spell with full intention to return then return beyond the time away you are allowed without reporting.

As I read it, absconding means one way away from the area, not to return. So you must intend to never come back to truly abscond, but when you do, you never absconded to begin with regardless of the time. Do snowbirds abscond when they leave the colder climates for warmer climates then return to colder climates? Does a robber really abscond after they have left the scene of a crime when they return? If you left the area in a public manner and return even after 7 or more days of being gone and not reported it, have you truly absconded?

Can certainly make this a game with LE and the DA with truly trying to understand the letter of the law vs spirit/intent of it.

Let’s suppose I hide out in my house, curtains drawn, no visible lights or activity, for the exact span of days where LEOs try to “be neighborly” (i.e. conduct a compliance check). From what’s said, they will assume I’ve absconded and I’ll have a felony warrant for arrest, despite breaking no law, and even though I’ve not been required to tell anyone anything or answer my door.. Yes, that is indeed supervision, not to mention prejudicial presumption of guilt, which I’m pretty sure is unconstitutional. That they don’t notice me is enough reasonable suspicion to warrant a warrant? BS.


In one way it is worse for me than when I was on probation. Then, the probation officer always scheduled a home visit by calling ahead of time when she was coming over. These compliance guys never do. That is one problem with it. We had an insurance salesman over one day giving a quote. The cops showed up with bullet proof vests looking for me. What of those who have internet exclusions. This basically announces to the neighborhood you are a criminal, whether the neighbors care to find that out for themselves or not. I was less of a threat when on probation than now, it appears. My probation officer always came plaon clothes as if she herself was a salesperson. They pull these officers from various departments to do these checks. They don’t know your individual circumstances like a parole or probation officer would. They basically treat everyone like a potential fugitive. So glad these aren’t required by law. A “Beware of Dog” and “No Trespassing” sign gives one some protection. Looking into surveillance cameras. We are in this on our own.

The authority under SORNA § 114(a)(7) is accordingly exercised to provide that jurisdictions must require sex offenders to provide information about any place in which the sex offender is staying away from their normal place of residence for seven or more days, including identifying the place and the period of time .

Thank you nondescript for the info.

Where do you see anything about having to notify anyone for travel over 14 days?

I have a question about IML.

Since the Due Process clause of the Fifth Amendment requires equal protection, is this going to be challenged in future IML challenges since it wasn’t the first time?

The reason being, someone can be off the registry in one state for a particular crime, and someone in another state that committed the exact same crime may be on the registry and subjected to the IML passport marker and denial of entry to most countries. Another example would be if someone residing in California got off the registry, but was put permanently back on for traveling to NY or Florida for longer than the minimum stay requiring registration. Now you have a situation where even other people in your own state are treated differently for the same thing.

Is the reason for not including this in the original case that none of the plaintiffs are in a situation where someone in another state that committed the same crime wouldn’t suffer from IML and therefore this particular group does not have the ability to raise this challenge? I would find that hard to believe.

Thank you

@Chris F
This is where the IML gets sloppy.
An analogy would be like having different Federal tax bracket structures in different States. Forcing a person in one State to pay more Federal income tax on the same income than a person in another State would be illegal.

Because the IML is a Federal Law, it should at the very least spell out the length of time each qualifying crime must be subject to it. If a registrant in Vermont is convicted of possession an indecent digital image, lets say as an example – that person is likely subject to registering and consequently the IML for 10 years. If a person in California or Florida commits the exact offense , that person is subject to registration and IML forever.

Now the Constitution states that the Federal Government can sanction any State that does not apply equal protection to all the citizens of that State , but in this case, the Federal Government is guilty of the same by monitoring (punishing) registrants in one State longer than another.

That’s right. We are never going to except the registry as a legitimate albeit annoying experimental membership scheme. It is …………punishment.

the most simplistic definition of punishment is :
[material impositions or exactions that are in themselves typically unwelcome: they deprive people of things that they value (liberty, money, time); they require people to do things that they would not normally want to do or do voluntarily ]

Here’s a quote from State Attorney General Xavier Becerra on an article written on March 29. It deals with criminal recordings, but the statement is quite striking to me.
link to article:

“The right to privacy is a cornerstone of California’s Constitution, and a right that is foundational in a free democratic society,” Becerra said.

If the right to privacy is a cornerstone of California’s Constitution, then omitting registrants off the registry via 1203.4 is in violation of said cornerstone. Registration is all about privacy. There is no true way off the registry, otherwise many others would be off the registry by now (implying CoR’s are not given out like candy). 1203.4 is a direct way to obtain privacy. State Gen Atty states ” right to privacy is a cornerstone of California’s constitution.”

Is there a way we can get clarification on what the State Gen Atty means by that? I truly want to understand what he means by that before declaring you’re a registered citizen of California. B/c I think there’s a double standard ongoing. A right to privacy, according the the cornerstone California Constitution, is an inalienable right that cannot be taken away, but it is with registration. hmmm… it’s also taken away the option to pursue and obtain it via 1203.4.

One more thing… I am a free citizen of California. Am I not a part of the “free democratic society”?

To those of you who use your real names on here: why? You do realize that if someone googles your name, your comments here will come up high in searches, right? I personally couldn’t imagine using my real name here; I think it would be highly unwise.

I should add that, unless one is trying to bury negative search results with positive and/or irrelevant info, we should be trying our best to minimize our digital footprints.

Some people on the registry are self employed (or have an understanding boss) with a good system of support from family and friends. Those people aren’t afraid of a google search, and welcome the fight from someone that wishes to confront them based on ignorance.

I’m not that person, but I greatly respect those that can fight the fight under their real identity and not just be seen by the public as the anonymous pedophile in a trench coat waiting to pounce on their kids.

Folks, “replies” that are long strings of vertical letters are unreadable. May I suggest that if you wish to make a reply to someone else’s comment, you simply start a new comment with “@ New Person” or “@ David”? In other words, just address your new comment to the person to whom you are replying. That way, we will all be able to read what you write.
Thanks all!!! 👍

@ David: Brilliant idea! I hope It catches on! 👍

@ David: I’m guessing you’re viewing this on a mobile device. I’ve found that when I use my phone, instead of a laptop or PC, the nested comments (replies) get narrower and narrower.

I wasn’t sure where to post this exactly if it should be in the Michigan section or in the General section, I know it is for Michigan Registrants, but maybe be for other registrants in other states as well, so any way here it is in case anyone else got this e-mail or did not get this e-mail.

If you or anyone you know received this – It is a scam per Miriam Aukerman (ACLU)

Vicki Henry

Today at 10:41 AM
If your or a loved one were convicted of a sex-crime prior to April 2011 and you haven’t already joined as a co-plaintiff in the consolidated Michigan Court of Claims case of Spencer v State Police Director, then you will want to reserve your place among whose who are now poised to have their name permanently removed from the sex-offender registry.  Don’t miss out on this limited-time opportunity! The time to join as a co-plaintiff has been limited by the court and expires soon!  CLICK HERE to learn more.


Vicki Henry
Women Against Registry, President
Fighting the Destruction of Families
Facebook:  Women Against Registry
Follow us on Twitter:   @WomenAgainstReg
LinkedIn group Families of Registrants
Reply Reply to All Forward More

SANCTUARY CITIES! Yes!! So the feds are threatening to withhold Justice Department grant funding to local law enforcement if the cities become “sanctuary cities”. But here’s the good news: lots of Residency Checks are supported by federal grant funding…. so go ahead and support sanctuary cities ….. and screw the $$$ out of local law enforcement and their repression of registered citizens!

So we have evidence that SORN for juveniles does no good…yet for some reason in adults it does? Huh. Must be because juveniles are more rational and calmer than adults. Crazy how when one is 17y364d old, there’s no rational basis, yet at the stroke of midnight and becoming 18y0d old there is. Riiiight. Perfect sense. Yup, let’s have that 17yo rapist get out of RC status in just a few years, but keep the 45yo who’s been straight for 20 years on SORN. Makes complete sense…. >:(


I’ve just recently ‘found’ this site and am so thankful for a forum like this. I would really appreciate some feedback as to what others might do in this situation.

1) I’m about to finish my Probation (this week-end). I will have a month vacation, first real one in 10 years. However, when I mentioned this to the local Sheriff here in GA I was told that I cannot be gone longer than two weeks otherwise it will be considered that I’ve absconded. First big pill to swallow.

2) I plan to visit South Carolina, Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma and perhaps Colorado. I’ve contacted the local sheriff in one of these states so far to verify the trigger time before I would have to “register” there and he was very courteous and helpful; Gave me his cell phone number and said to call him if I had any problems. So I guess my second concern is whether I should contact all the other places as well. Also, can anyone tell me if this ‘matrix’ is up to date?

Welcome aboard, Cap’n! Yes, this is a wonderful forum to learn, teach, empathize, sympathize and just plaid old vent! Hopefully you’ll continue to find it helpful.

As to your questions:

1) If the local yokel says you cannot travel for more than 14 days, I’d ask for that in writing. If they’re stupid enough to do that, I’d next bring it to a competent attorney, as it’s a blatant, unconstitutional violation of your freedom to travel. It’s imposing punishment, ex post facto. So I guess you’re banned from owning an out-of-state vacation home where you must stay long enough to qualify for IRS deduction? No way.
What I suspect the dude meant to say is you cannot leave without letting them know. That is part of SCOTUS’s Smith ruling. I suggest you read and learn your state laws on RC requirements. For instance here in MS, I have to advise if going to be gone for more than 7 consecutive days, which I believe follows SORNA. Oddly, I must also give them 10 days notice of my intent to return…so I guess 3 days before I’m gone I have to let them know I’m coming back. It hasn’t mattered so far.

2) Read and learn the laws of each of the state’s for what they determine a “resident” to be and what the do with the info once you are a “resident.” Some states give you 3 days before needing to register, some longer, some shorter. To be safe, assume any portion of any calendar day to count as a day–IOW don’t think 3 days = 72 hours. It could equal 1 min + 24 hours + 1 min. Ironically, one of the better resources can be found at (I guess a bunch of hyper-vigilant freaked out, obsessed people will tend to have the latest info). Don’t take it as gospel, though. Read each state’s actual laws. If you don’t get legalese now, you will learn it as you read the laws. Usually you can find a state’s laws by Googling “AR SOR law” or “OK SOR law” or the like.

Good luck, and try to enjoy your travels! You can travel domestically almost like a non-RC. Almost. But…be VERY careful with FL. Some say avoid it completely, due to its severe retention and publication of data even after you leave.

Thank you for your reply AJ,
& yes your reply is already helpful since I don’t even know how to google these land mines for rc’s.

Funny that you should mention FL because I just spoke with a friend from there today and was looking forward to “visiting” for 4 days max as to stay below the trigger time (to register) of “5 days or more” based on this:
“Residence” means either (1) a place where one spends 5 or more consecutive days, (2) a place where one spends 5 or more aggregate days in a calendar year, or (3) a county in
which one is present for 5 or more aggregate days in a calendar year. Registrants must appear to register with law enforcement w/in 48 hours of establishing a residence, and must appear to provide any updates within 48 hours.

However, it appears that I would need to register after being there for only 48 hours according to this:
” … if an offender or predator is visiting Florida from another state, he or she must report in person to the sheriff’s office within 48 hours of establishing a temporary residence in Florida.”

Not so appealing now but if one were undaunted & determined to still go there and remain under the trigger time to register and remain compliant (certainly my intention) … I’m now thinking of the plausibility to drive just north of the border, like Valdosta, spend the night – maybe in a hotel. Get up early & drive there, spend the day and night there, wake-up and spend the next day there as well but leave that night. Does that sound right? Geez, talk about walking on egg shells. Let’s do the math.

Recap that scenario from the last paragraph: cross FL border say, 8 a.m. on a Tuesday, be at my destination by noon. Hang out the rest of the day, spend the night. Spend the next day there maybe even have dinner but plan on leaving by 9 p.m. to allow for some buffer. Get back over the border by 1 a.m. on Wednesday night / Thursday morning. That would tally up to a grand total of 41 hours in FL. If all goes to plan that should keep me compliant without registering. Does that sound right? Anyone?

CORRECTION – Sorry for the wasted space everyone, I just now noticed that “temporary residence” IS defined as 5 or more days based on the hyperlink under question 6 on FAQ (my second link up above) – I just didn’t click on it the first time I read it. If you do here’s what it reads:

“Temporary Residence – A place where the person (offender/predator) abides, lodges, or resides, including, but not limited to, vacation, business, or personal travel destinations in or out of this state, for a period of 5 or more days in the aggregate during any calendar year, and which is not the person’s permanent address or, for a person whose permanent residence is not in this state, a place where the person is employed, practices a vocation, or is enrolled as a student for any period of time in this state.”

So it appears I can stay 4 days without triggering a residence / registration requirement. New scenario, cross the border 7 am on Tuesday, leave the state before midnight Friday night. Anyone?

After reading the statutes it does actually clearly spell out 5 days as the trigger for establishing a temporary residence. An out of state registrant visiting/vacationing in Florida would only need to register within 48 hrs of entering Florida IF they intended on staying there for more than 5 days.

This is very similar to California law ( for out of State visitors to come here ) Did they change the law there? I thought it was if an out-of-State registrant was physically present in Florida for more than 48 hrs, they were required to register.

I would still make a telephone call (or have someone call on your behalf) to a main sheriffs AND law enforcement offices to clarify and get a consensus among these agencies before you step foot into that State. Orlando police might be a good place to start since that is a vacation destination. Just my thought.

I agree with Nondescript about contacting LEOs and/or the state SOR agency prior to setting foot on that swampy soil. The cost of doing wrong is way too high. Keep in mind what I mentioned about what “3 days” means. Typically that means any portion of any calendar day counts as a day. That’s why I mentioned that 1 min + 24 hours + 1 min could equal 3 days. If the law meant 72 hours, it would say 72 hours.

Also, it appears to me you have 48 hours after establishing residency in which to register. So not until you have spent 5 days aggregate does the 48 hours kick in. Or so it reads to this non-attorney.

As a question to anyone out there: the law defining temporary residence states “[a] place” where one stays an aggregate of 5 days. So if I stay at multiple places as an out-of-stater and each is 4 days or less in various counties, does that mean I never establish “temporary residence”? Punctuation means EVERYthing in courts and law ( If they mean/t any and all places totaling 5 days, they should have said that, or “a place or places.” But they didn’t. 😉

Anyone from FL or with a JD who cares to chime in?


This seems to have changed. Now it says…. state law doesn’t have to abide by federal appeals court rulings. I’m confused… Since when??

These articles say otherwise.

Michigan’s request to halt sex offender ruling is denied.

Kagan denies Schuette’s appeal to halt sex offender ruling.

Sex offender laws and the 6th Circuit’s Ex Post Facto Clause ruling.

If you read the response from the state of Michigan they come right out and admit they can’t legally enforce the law.

Michigan Attorney General knows prosecutors can’t enforce SORA with Michigan qualified sex offenders.

My question is… Why is this case being treated different? The Supreme Court refused to stay the law allowing Michigan to keep enforcing it.

@David M
You had me scratching my head a bit, until I found a pretty decent explanation: and also

I’m still not entirely clear on it myself, but from reading the ACLU brief, it appears the 6th cannot strike down MI SORA itself, but can strike down the US Constitution (USCon) elements that are Ex Post Facto (EPF). I think had Does sued against an EPF that may exist in MI’s constitution, the 6th would have had no mandatory power at all.

What I think it all means is that the MI AG cannot enforce any of the EPF portions, which were decided as a federal issue. But MI AG can continue to enforce any and all other elements of MI SORA, as they are intrastate–not federal–issues.

All very confusing, indeed. I guess the lesson here is one should always try to sue that something violates federal law and the USCon, and ignore the state-level equivalents.

On an unrelated, side note, one should read how Congress abuses the Commerce Clause to federalize all sorts of activities, criminal and civil alike. Pretty much the argument goes that any interference upon another human being affects interstate commerce, and thus they can write a law about it. and among many others.

Thank you AJ.

“Pretty much the argument goes that any interference upon another human being affects interstate commerce”. Then, could not the looseness in interpretation of the commerce clause be used to advantage? An RC traveling on business is being hampered by notification laws and presence restrictions, therefore it is adversely affecting interstate commerce.

TSA Precheck Approved!

Many have asked here if we are eligible for TSA Precheck. After going through the process, it appears that the answer is a possible yes, depending on your background.

First, my background. January 2007, I plead no contest to a single misdemeanor count of 311.11 pc (possession). I was sentenced to 90 day’s county jail, plus 3 year’s summary probation, and mandatory lifetime registration. I had zero issues with probation, and my case was expunged in May 2010. I am excluded from the Megan’s Law website, and had zero criminal history prior to this, and none since.

I travel domestically fairly often (12 times a year, on average). More often than not, I randomly received TSA Precheck. This made me wonder if I formalized the process and just signed up, would I be approved. I’ve himmed and hawed for at least a year but finally decided to give it a go.

The process is fairly easy, and only takes a few minutes. To begin, you build a profile at DHS’ Universal Enrollment website. The questions are pretty simple, and relate to your identity (name, date of birth, etc.), with 4 dedicated to criminal history. The questions are directly related to this set of disqualifiers: The questions are, within the past 7 years, have you been convicted of an offense listed in Part A….within the past 7 years, have you been convicted of an offense listed in Part B….to your knowledge, does Part C apply to you…..

Once you are done, you are provided with a unique identifying number. Make note of it! Alternatively, if you provided an email address when you built your profile, you will receive an email with that same identifier.

Next, you will select a location for your “interview”. Of special note is the fact that the government contracts the interview process to a third party. I selected a location inside a local tax office, as it was most convenient to where I live. I skipped the appointment scheduling because it was 30 days out, and opted instead to do a walk-in.

The very next morning, I walked in to the office and presented myself for the “interview”. The interview is NOT so much an interview, as a recap of the answers you provided to the questions when you enrolled online. The interviewer will ask you for your identifying number provided to you when you enrolled online, and will enter that number into the computer system. The profile you built online will pop up on a computer monitor that’s facing you. You will sit at a desk facing a computer monitor, and the interviewer will run through each question asking you if your response is correct. They will also ask you for identification documents. I provided my passport, and my driver’s license. There are several document options available, and those can be found here:

Once you have confirmed that your answers are correct, you will complete a quick Livescan using a desktop Livescan machine. They take thumb prints, as well as each finger. After that, you’re all done! The whole interview process took about 10 minutes, and costs $85.

At this point, you are done, and waiting. At any point in time, you can check the status of your application here:

The day after my interview (24 hours later), I checked my status. It came up as “security threat review is being completed”. The day after that (48 hours after interview), it changed to “Eligibility Determined…TSA has mailed you a letter”. Also, the field that contains your “Known Traveler Number”, or KTN, was “unassigned”. Since the result of this process is receiving the KTN which you can then provide to the airline anytime you book travel in order to access the Precheck lanes, I assumed I had been denied. My assumption was that if my eligibility had been determined, and the KTN field was “unassigned”, then this translated to a denial, with a denial letter being sent to me. I later learned through a travel blog, and through friends, that in fact this is standard operating procedure. EVERYONE who applies will have their status change to “eligibility determined…letter sent”, with NO KTN provided.

96 hours after my interview, I received an email from TSA welcoming me to the TSA Precheck program, and advising me that I can check my status to retrieve my KTN. I promptly checked my status, and retrieved my KTN. Of special note is that I had travel booked…so I called the airline and provided them with my KTN.

Today, when I grabbed my boarding pass, there it was! TSA Precheck!

I compared my experience with those of several friends who have been through the process. We all had the exact same experience….same online enrollment….exact same interview process. Also, we have all been through the process at different places, and different states. Since the process was the exact same for all of us, it appears that’s completely standardized, and will be the same for everyone, regardless of where they complete the process.

That’s my experience! If you travel often, and have been conviction free for at least 7 years AND/OR have never been convicted of an offense listed on their website, I’d encourage you to apply.

Have a nice evening.


OK, so I was approached by a consumer drone (UAV) company a week ago, and interviewed with them at the end of last week. I got a job offer today for six figures.

I am not currently registered here in Utah, they took me off. But, I still have not received an official notice from the State office – just a cordial phone call from local P.D. I am a military offender. Whether they should have kept me on or not is debatable.

The new job requires some travel. Maybe to California twice a year, and maybe the same for China.

1) How long can I be in California without having to register?

2) If the AWA says I much register for another 15 years, but my state does not register me; will I be flagged under IML? Must I report my travel even though my state does not register me?

Geeze, John, you are one of the people who’s posts I always go out of my way to read…

This is important enough that you need very good legal advice…I’d make an appointment to go see Chance down in Irvine, I think, or Janice up in Sacramento.

The kicker in your case is that you are not a required to register at the moment…Unfortunately, I don’t think anyone knows how the IML angle will play out for any of us…but insisting that you are a non-registrant…maybe the IML will not apply to you…or so I hope for you.

Likewise CA is a pretty harsh 5 working days….see CA rules here, but also like the IML…you are not a registrant and so you could skate clear, I really don’t know.

Good Luck & Best Wishes, James

I had the same basic question a year or so ago (being off the registry in my state and wanting to visit CA) and was told by multiple sources that each county/city in CA was allowed to make up their own rules. I had even talked on the phone with someone in the AG office and they even told me so. I asked him if there was actually the five days rule and he told me that they left it to each jurisdiction was allowed to define residency however they like. I was told that some will say that even if you stay somewhere one night, that one had to register. I had really hoped to make a small visit of 3 or 4 days to see some family, but am scared to step foot into that state.

The requirement to register in a city or county within 5 days is triggered by establishing a new residence in that city or county, not by merely “visiting” the city of county. This is a state law that cannot be changed by a local government including a city or county.

This “establishing a new residency” idea is only in the state of California or can it apply to any other state?

Visiting is not establishing a new residency. But there was a recent article stating that being present for a few hours three days a week for a week constitutes as establishing a new residency.

I would truly love to visit family outside of California, but I’m too traumatized to leave the state for fear of breaking a law that I did not know existed. Thereby, increasing my chances to register in two states as well as be on the federal map. It depresses me to tell my sister that I’m too chicken to visit (for Christmas) b/c of registration.

I truly am traumatized and believe I’m a monster b/c that’s how the laws and society paints me. My case is expunged, but I don’t feel any change. If anything, I just feel more hopelessness because no matter how hard I try to overcome this, nothing changes. This is readily apparent on every birthday. TBH, I hate my birthdays since I started to register. Might as well re-name it “registration day”. There isn’t anything positive about that day or week before nor after. I’m not a person during that week. I’m an inmate getting booked all over again. The long waiting time gives me flashbacks of waiting in the tank. Fingerprints inked. Pictures taken. Law Enforcement reading my rights (registration paperwork). It’s never gonna end… this perpetual punishment. 2003 Smith decision intimated that in-person annuals are a form of punishment and that the 2003 Smith decision will not cross that threshold. ::: raising shoulders :::

anyhow, thanks for reading, supporting, and fighting for all registrants, Janice.

I, too, have complete and total loss of enjoyment of life as a result from being bad-mouthed and made a spectacle out of online. It implies that I’m up to no good and can never be trusted! I no longer celebrate Christmas, Thanksgiving or any other holidays.. so needless to say, my birthday is just another day to me.

The registry is too militant, adversarial and vindictive.

Registering is always traumatic because it reminds us we are second class citizens. However many counties make registration quick and easy with the use of appointments. My county was terrible at first as we had to get booked into jail, but all that changed about 9 years ago. Now we make an appointment, go to an out of the way side building to register and we’re out in 15-30 minutes depending how talkative the registration officer is. All very polite and professional. Maybe it’s time you think about moving to a better county. It may be worth it to reduce your stress from registration.

Here is the definition of reside/residency in most tribal/ Indian reservation registration laws. They have followed SORNA guidelines to the letter and are some of the strictest in the country

x. “Residence” or “Residency” means a place where a person, including Students, temporary Employees, and military personnel on assignment, is living or temporarily staying for longer than thirty (30) consecutive days, such as a shelter or structure that can be located by a street address or landmarks, including, but not limited to, houses, apartment buildings, motels, hotels, homeless shelters, and recreational and other vehicles.

“Reside” or Resides” means with respect to an individual, the location of the individual’s home or other place where the individual lives, sleeps, or frequents for more than thirty (30) consecutive days.

Note that some States have added laws regarding ” temporary lodging” to their registration acts. I don’t think California is one of them.

Are you bed-ridden or confined to a wheel chair? Are you dying in a hospital? I hope not. A lot of people are and would trade places with an able-bodied RC in a New York minute.
Being on the registry sucks. It’s less of a Price Club membership and more like living with a disease. Yet we live, nonetheless. At least I do.
Go visit your sister for a few days and come home. Go see her again in 6 months. Stop letting this BS define you and enjoy your life as much as you can. It’s too damn short.

Being anonyms of your intentions and actions is a good tool to use.

Looks like it’s 14 days strait or 30 days total per year for temporary workers based on your link.
Those working in the state for 14 days or for more than 30 days in a calendar year must register.

I’m not sure if this is the proper place to post a question like this, it’s a redirect me if I’m wrong.

I have a question regarding child custody where there is a parent that is demonstrating attributes of parental alienation. (Allow me little grace as I’m trying to familiarize myself with some legal terminology ). In short I have a mother who, on a whim, revokes my “privliage” to have uninterrupted time with my son. She also has texted me stating that she is looking to throw me back in jail.

Apparently, you need to go back to court to solidify your parental rights?
Perhaps, a public defender can guide you in the right direction.
Good luck.

Well the first question is; do you have a court ordered visitation schedule? If not, petition the court to get one. You can easily do that yourself without an attorney. The filing fee is about $35 and the court can wave that if you request it and can prove a very low income. If you do have a court ordered visitation/custody schedule, then you can ask the police to stand by while you pick up your child or you might have to file contempt of court charges if she is breaking a court order. Always document all contacts and emails with the mother.

You might think about saving the text. Having evidence of a threat, if she does a false accusation, will be helpful in your defence.

When a sex offender moves into a neighborhood, houses within a one-tenth mile area around the sex offender’s home fall by 4 percent on average. Damn sex offenders, no wonder the value of my home has not gone up in years.

The authors of this statistic estimate that a single offender depresses property values in the immediate vicinity by $4,500 to $5,500 per home (average home prices around $180,000). Altogether, the presence of sex offenders has shrunk property values in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina by about $58 million.

In San Diego, a guy just yesterday sat in a lounge chair and shot seven people enjoying themselves at a pool party. When are they going to come up with a risk instrument to identify guys like that?

At least one person on this board mentioned living in an RV, another living in his car.
I’m amazed at the number of RVs parked in the WalMart parking lot, and along various streets throughout the SFV, wherever they won’t be cited. Many belong to regular folks who have no room in the driveway and can’t park on the street in front of their homes, I’m sure, but many are clearly occupied.
In one case there were kids playing right outside the RV in a parking lot at Ralph’s. Broke my heart. One guy had a car loaded with most of his worldly possessions, the rest were in a trailer hitched behind.
At my office there’s a guy who parks his newish (still has paper plates) Mercedes van in the lot, then I see him parked on a nearby street everyday without fail.
I’m wondering how many of these people are just nomads by choice, down on their luck, or registered citizens with no place else to go?
My thoughts and prayers go out to these people and wish there was something I could do to help, especially the struggling families and fellow registrants.

I can’t speak to most of your post, but as someone who’s done it, I can clarify about those RVs at Walmart. Walmart actively welcomes RVers for a couple reasons. First is that the help deter crime with those extra sets of (traveling, wary) eyes camped out there. Second is that it drums up business and probably a bit of loyalty as well.


Not in all cities.. the walmarts around where I am clearly has signs posted, no overnight camping

Thank you for that info. I’ve never seen that, but certainly don’t dispute it. It doesn’t change the RVs seen by the other poster, nor my having done it. Wally World is typically RV-friendly, so perhaps it’s a zoning issue around you or something in their lease with those properties. No matter.


I wonder how much home value would drop, if these people knew the people next door is a meth addict and can come in-glue in seconds?

Or if they knew the lady next door, who offered to drive their kids to school, spent time in the loony bin after smothering her own infant and drives on a revoked license thanks to multiple DUIs and a manslaughter conviction after running a red light and killing a kid in a crosswalk?
I’d live next to an RC any day before her!

Does anyone know if private schools do background checks on parents to deny sex offenders getting their kids into the school? I know they do for volunteers and employees, but what about parents during the process of applying to get their kid in?

I’m in Texas, but any idea what I am in for if I try no matter what state?


Private Catholic schools in California do not.

Unless this is some super exclusive school ( Thurston Howell III voice here) where only children of the finest breeding are permitted (eye roll), the school is probably only interested in your credit background and ability to pay tuition on time.

Did my yearly here in Long Beach, CA.. Looks like they did a step backwards in time, no 3D photos or digital fingerprints.. Now its old school ink and paper and one cheap digital camera.. about 6 pages of papet, fingerprint on all of them.. I see the high tech stuff is still mounted on the walls and that fancy live scan is still there.. New staff, looks like the older guys has long retired.. now its young police officers taking over (green uniforms) .. no fear or harassment, just the basic approach of I’m here lets fill out lots of paperwork.

My county has always used an old camera and ink fingerprints. They don’t do full sets, just one on all the signed pages.