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)


WI: Why sex offenders suing southeast Wisconsin cities

Several southeast Wisconsin cities are now the target of federal lawsuits by registered sex offenders. The two civil rights attorneys representing them recently won a major verdict against Pleasant Prairie. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. AJ

    “A federal judge just issued a preliminary injunction against Yorkville in response to the lawsuit, stating that there’s no evidence an offender who lived in Yorkville is any more or less likely to commit another sex crime than an offender who didn’t.”
    >>It’s so refreshing and heartening to see the judges are now not just hearing the truth about recidivism, but are stating it themselves.

    “Milwaukee has not made any changes in its rules, but Alderman Michael Murphy, who warned about the repercussions when the city debated adding an ordinance in 2014, says changes will be likely.

    “’And not just in Milwaukee,’ he adds, ‘but throughout the state of Wisconsin, and potentially the whole country.’”
    >> And likewise that this alderman gets it, and apparently has since 2014. He also sees the potential of the whole BS scheme collapsing. I can already hear the LEOs crying that it hampers their ability to fight and prevent crime, refusing to accept anything as truth besides 80% recidivism.

  2. New Person

    Kenosha similarly cut its buffer zones down to 1,000 feet from 2,500, and removed a clause that said a registered sex offender couldn’t live within six blocks of another sex offender. The plaintiff attorneys had argued there’s no evidence the distance between sex offenders has any bearing on public safety.

    Wait, couldn’t this apply to viewing ML? If living next to one another doesn’t have any bearing on public safety, then why does looking at ML be a felonious act? There’s no statistical bearing to public safety living to one another. Why would viewing ML be a public safety? I don’t get this at all.

    • AlexO

      That whole clause on ML about not looking is completely stupid given that you can simply look at the numerous 3rd party websites to get the same info. And since all those websites are hosted by private companies, the ML clause doesn’t apply to them. So in essence, if you enter the main door, you’re committing a felony. But if you use the smaller door next to it to enter the exact same lobby, you’re good to go! This is pretty much the entire registry in a nutshell with all of its restrictions post supervision.

    • AJ

      I’ve long wondered the rational behind not being able to look. I guess RCs don’t have the right to public safety as non-RCs. It’s all about public safety, we’re told,…but I guess just not for us.

      • Timmr

        I think when they come up with these laws they just come up with anything that sounds restrictive and/or will faciltate sending you back to prison.

      • Harry

        At a earlier post here, it was mentioned it was to prevent RCs from knowing about other RCs. Hence using the ML web data for cooperative purposes. It a little late as the cat is already out of the house.

  3. Brubaker

    More power to you, Mark Weinberg & Adele Nicholas attorneys defending & protecting our Constitution,
    Now more than ever.
    Outstanding work. Keep it going.
    Thank you.

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 *