Criminal justice leaders seek to end lifetime registry for low-risk sex offenders in California

It’s been nearly four decades since a 25-year-old Frank Lindsay landed on California’s sex offender registry after he pleaded no contest to improperly touching a girl under 14.

He has not committed another crime since then, but state law requires Lindsay’s name to remain on the registry, which the public can see on government websites, for the rest of his life. Full Article

Related posts

Notify of

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


  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Sad that oncefallen felt the need to attack Janice and ACSOL publicly in his comments on that article. His public criticism only hurts all of our various efforts of reform.

“Overhauled?” This is ludicrous. The registry should be completely done away with, as it has never served or functioned as intended. It would seem lies are now accepted truth and the truth is simply ignored.

Wonderful news! Finally a route off the registry. Face it, the registry is here to stay. These changes/reforms will at least create an end and way off.

I think this is exactly what was needed and frankly am shocked it passed. It is hopeful to see some facts and reason used instead of raw illogical emotions.

This was long overdue and hopefully the remaining states such as Florida will follow the same path and offer light at the end of a dark tunnel and end the cruel lifetime punishment now in place!

Way to go California!

I was watching KRON 4 news this morning. The change in registration (SB421) was mentioned briefly. The news announcer commented on how a convicted sex offender can live next door and you would not know it. The spin starts.

The comments section is an eye opening read.

A commenter stated, I’m paraphrasing, “they’re going to let these sex offenders go free?!”

See, that’s a problem. Once you’re out of custody, you’re already a free person. But the registry posits it differently. Here, the mass public believes we’re not free. Despite many on the comments section countering with, “if they’re that dangerous, then how are they let out of jail?”

The dichotomy is astounding. The public sees sex offenders as still being punished as they’re not free, but those sex offenders are no longer in jail. Apparently, the public doesn’t comprehend that a sex offender has already paid their dues to society and are still being forced to serve the state after their dues have been paid.

Hmmm… that would be an interesting project. Have a camera crew go around the state of California and ask people, “If you’ve paid your due to your crime, then should you continue to serve the state?”

It’s an innocuous question.

Then follow up with:

“Are you a free person again after you’ve paid your debt to society, but are still forced to serve the state?”


“Would you consider it unconstitutional to force you to serve the state after you’ve paid your debt to society?”

Then start asking congressmen and congresswomen. Afterwards, ask lawyers. Ask judges.

I’d really like to hear what many people would say. Remember, don’t divulge anything related to the registry or sex offenders. That way you’re positing a question for any crime.