ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)


IL: Task force seeks consensus on sex offender proposals

A statewide task force considering changes in how Illinois tracks sex offenders reached consensus this week on some key points, but agreement on reforms to several politically sensitive measures that could make it easier for offenders to start over after a conviction will require more deliberation. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. ab

    Law enforcement should have no say in management questions. This is a social issue and can best be resolved by insuring whatever might lead someone to commit an offense is no longer prevalent in society. In other words assist people in fulfilling their desires and needs legitimately so they have no interest in seeking out illegitimate fulfillment. Fortunately if guidance begins early enough in life it will be easier to continue helping someone make small adjustments later.

  2. New Person

    Here is a very sad comment from the article:
    As a member of the task force, McLean County State’s Attorney Jason Chambers opposes the view of some members that the public registry does more harm than good and should be eliminated.

    “You don’t need a study to tell you the registry is helpful,” said Chambers, citing the need to keep track of those who may look for more victims, including children, if left unmonitored.

    The state attorney believes there is no need for any review of any sort. I suppose justice cannot be measured. The world is flat! You don’t need to sail and navigate the world to know the world is flat! The earth is the center of the universe. You don’t need science to tell you the earth is the center of the universe!

    • Registry Rage

      They will say and do anything to protect their cushy pie jobs! Oh and “our children..”

      • Harry

        And, at the same time, butchering millions of pre-born children in doctors offices, calling it women health care.

    • AJ

      “You don’t need a study to tell you the registry is helpful,” said Chambers, citing the need to keep track of those who may look for more victims, including children, if left unmonitored.

      I think what he meant to say was, “you can’t find a study to tell you the registry is helpful.” 🙂 What I find odd are his later comments and quotes, which seem incongruous with his first, misguided quote: “Also, expert testimony provided to the task force on recidivism rates for sex offenders should be recognized in future talks on the varying risk posed by offenders, said Chambers. ‘There’s significant data that shows there are different levels of risk'” Ummm, Mr. Chambers, those experts will rely on studies about the (lack of) value of registries, and “data” come from where? Oh yeah, studies.

      Also telling to me from this article is the whole thing is straining under its own weight:
      “Greg Sullivan, executive director of the Illinois Sheriff’s Association, questioned…'[w]here is the funding going to come from? I hope we won’t take it from what we already need,” [] adding the state is already behind in funding the cost of the registry.'” Hate to break it to you, Mr. Sullivan, but tough luck that you have more BS to do than money to cover it. Perhaps if you weren’t chasing ghosts via SORA, you’d have a few more $$$ to use elsewhere. Sucks to have to enforce stupid policy, doesn’t it buddy? Yeah, I’m really torn-up that you’re struggling.


      • New Person

        Or it can be seen as…

        It’s totes obvee that registrants are bad (hence, no need for review). We can find an expert that supports our claim that registrants are bad. All we need is one to state the worst case scenario and we can tell the public that high recidivism rate is the norm for all registrants b/c the masses never do proper research.

        Also, remember, their definition of recidivism could be more encompassing than its true definition. Case in point, CASOMB used to include not registering as a re-offense in its recordings. They’ve amended it recently to not be counted as a re-offense, which is why the recidivism rates have dropped to under 1%.

        Politicians are devious. Look at where we are now?

        A review of is different from using projected recidivism rates from an expert. A review is concrete, not a projection. That’s why he doesn’t want a review. What if it shows less than 1% re-offense rate in his area? That would dispel any recidivist projections. You can’t argue with projections b/c they can’t be disputed.


        As for money, this has always been an issue, but insignificant when “fear” is introduced. For a parallel, the CA tiered proposal should save money, but some politicians say it doesn’t really save much. Remember, CASOMB already has the recidivism rate below 1%. Why spend any monies on a program where the re-offense rate is under 1%? That makes no sense at all and yet CA is still pushing for more added penalties.

        Fear supersedes facts and monies. But that fear was made legit by the SCOTUS in the 2003 Smith decision, making all registrants one group who are a public dangers to society. Hence, why there is a need for public safety for monsters with 80% recidivism rates.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *