ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (3/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings
ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18, 2021

California

Bill offers needed reform for sex offender registry

California’s cluttered sex offender registry is too large to be effective and must be reformed if it is to be of any use to law enforcement. Full Article

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.  
 
21 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I see it but I don’t believe it.

It’s the stubbornness and ignorance of the law enforcement in San Jose Police Union president that doesn’t want to believe that the Sex Offender Registration is flaud police officers are over swamped with sexoffenders who can’t focus on the high and most serious sexoffenders nor does he know that there is already a Federal sex offenders registration called the Adam Walsh child protective that claimed and States all states should create and must create their own tiered program so basically and technically there’s already a law in place he should know that you can’t watch every sex offender 24 hours… Read more »

oh yes they should hold on to someone to punish #$&*^%, if for nothing else for superstition that the registry really works , besides that they never run out of the need for a whipping post maybe that will generate jobs for RC’s , they are always watching , we see them here at the very least once a day , as well as 5 or 6 cam carting fools letting us know how much better they are than we are , new people move in here come the cam carting fools to let them know where the RC’s are… Read more »

One of the comments in the article, of course, refers to the 10,000 registrants coming off the registry as ‘sexual predators’. Logically speaking, how can every single person be a sexual predator? Who determines that? This person seems to know things. I suppose that means I was guilty of that the first time I pee’d off the side of the road as a child.

The unforgiven- show me where it says 10,00 sexual predators to be released in this article. What I read was positive, logical thinking in a attempt to educated the public about the bloated out of wack register, and how its not effective for the safety of the general public. Educating people it’s true purpose was to be a tool for the police. Not fear driven laws being added to the 290, which morphed it into a useless listed. I found no fear mongering comments as you stated. It saddness me all you got from the artical was negative not positive… Read more »

Unforgiven citizen,

“The Unforgiven” said “One of the COMMENTS in the article said 10,000 registrants coming off the registry as sexual predators”, which is stated as a comment below the article, not in the article itself.

Yes, it was from someone speaking for “keep kids safe”. I get emails from them asking me to join so I can get notices of “predators” in my area. I should sign on and start networking with other registrants.

Yes, you could sign up with them and give them the inside scoop of our fun vacation gatherings and the location of our secret planning meetings. In fact send them on a predator hunt to one of our planned secret gatherings far away to the middle of nowhere in some empty building. Now that would be fun for them (and us, lol).

I thought the meetings were held behind the bushes? This explains why I’m always the only one there. Nobody tells me anything.

I thought they were held near a park, in a van, with all of us wearing trench coats and occasionally asking passersby if they’ll help us fiind our puppy.

Meeting, Monday, July 24, 12 noon, coordinates 36.219681,-116.844879
Bring water.

So freakin sorry I typed it wrong, holy crap!! Geez people! “One of the comments in the article…” should have been “One of the comments BELOW the article…” Everyone can now move on. Thank you Unforgiven citizen for showing me my error. Thank god you are perfect.

Ahh, the value of the proper preposition. 🙂

Perhaps that moniker needs to be changed to “Unforgiving Citizen.”

Great. more support is always better! Except that when they say “high” risk offenders, they are missing out on the fact those so designated are only because of a stupid Static 99 SARATSO score.

Which according to their own user guide should be re-evaluated two years after release and the general risk is halved for every 5 years you stay straight. It really sounds a lot more like a tool for the purposes of supervision than something to be used long term.

I’m going to go with dubious scoring system. As some others, as well as AlexO, say: they can keep it as one of many “tools” for parole and probation. But to use the Static 99 (R) as the only “tool” to put people into tier 3? This is highly UNACCEPTABLE. Especially when the “tool” is junk science that lumps all offender data. Someone please post link about how said data is actually held SECRET by Karl Hanson. Question is, if K. Hanson has got nothing to hide, why not be transparent. I smell fraud. And someone should expose Hanson for… Read more »

http://forensicpsychologist.blogspot.com/2012/12/judge-bars-static-99r-risk-tool-from.html Don’t know if it’s still accurate, as it is dated 2012. But the link notes that Karl Hanson is in violation of the American Psychological Association’s Ethics Code. Specifically: “The American Psychological Association’s Ethics Code requires psychologists to furnish data, after their research results are published, to ‘other competent professionals who seek to verify the substantive claims through reanalysis’ (Section 8.14).” It also notes: “At least five researchers have been rebuffed in their attempts to review Static-99 data over the past few years, for purposes of research replication and reanalysis.” Apparently, Section 8.14 of the APA Ethics Code was… Read more »

This reminds me of a case a number of years back in MN regarding “trade secrets” and Breathalyzers. The MN SC ruled the source code had to be released, as the defendant has a right to view all evidence the State has. Perhaps this is an angle individuals could use against this test.
https://www.wired.com/2009/05/minnesota-court-release-source-code-of-breath-testing-machines/
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2009/05/mn-supreme-court-says-yes-to-intoxilyzer-source-code-requests/

Great read! Interesting comments too! Encourage others here to read this. I think this may be a way to get it tossed from CA, et al consideration. There are some stat students and professionals who may want to review this process for validation and possible tossing from the analyses of RCs.

It’s certainly suspicious when a so-called researcher won’t release data for external, objective analysis. What’cha hidin’ there, buddy??

I clicked the link to the original article… 1st thing, the pic of the so called AGENT “Dan Roumbanis” typical Thug looking loser…. Shaved head to make him look tough, and what is wit the mid 90’s flip cell phone, he mister agent is that a cool 386 your using ? lol… Wait my mistake he may have a 486 !! he is using windows XP ! mister Parole agent…. your so cool !!! Do you drive a Geo Metro as your personal car ?

21
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.