The Twentynine Palms City Council couldn’t stomach what it had to do. So, last night, instead of repealing local restrictions on where sex offenders can live, the Council deferred the matter until its next meeting when a public hearing will be held. Full Article
Related posts
-
IL: Current policies funnel large number of… [people] …into one building. That needs to change
The state’s job is to balance the needs and rights of… …with those of all others.... -
NY: Sex offenders can be detained after sentences completed
New York’s top court upheld a law Monday that allows the state to keep sex offenders... -
NE: Homeowner Association Seeking Injunction Against Sex Offender Residency
A Beatrice homeowners association is seeking a judge’s order that would prevent a convicted sex offender...
Wait a second; Janice isn’t a “Sacramento attorney.” Did someone get the fact’s wrong?
http://z1077fm.com/a-full-house-sees-twentynine-palms-council-postpone-sex-offender-restriction-vote/
And isn’t anyone ever going to tell theses people that these restrictions don’t really do anything other than break up families and crate homelessness, etc?
⛥⛥⛥⛥⛥ Great letter, Janice!
“[A] sheriff’s spokesman assured them that state restrictions will still be enforced.”
—-
What exactly is that supposed to mean? It at first sounds like they will enforce the 2000′ anyway, but I wonder if it was sly, bureaucratic doublespeak. One infers one thing, but the statement says only very basic facts.
Councilman McArthur Wright expressed what seemed to be in everyone’s heart. “I’ve literally lost sleep on this.”
——
Try sleeping on the street, or under a bridge, like RCs forced into homelessness must do. See if that helps with your sleep problem, Councilman.
It they had not gleefully passed the unconstitutional law to begin with they would not be in this situation of having to reverse and upset their citizens. Thank god for Janice and Company. I hope they don’t and have to pay lots of legal fees.
I’m still confused where California stands on residency restrictions for those no longer on supervision? The annual paperwork that I sign specifically talks about the 2000 ft barrier but also states that at the moment it’s not really being enforced except in some cases where it was previously imposed while under supervision. So what does that all mean? If its on the books but not being enforced, just like in this case, shouldn’t they repeal it entirely?
I actually had a scary experience while I was on my probation supervision when this 2015 ruling came down. I was living in my apartment of 20 years and received a termination of tenancy from my landlord (they found out my status but didn’t say as much in the letter as by law they don’t need to say why unless you have a lease, which I didn’t). As I was scrambling to find a new home, this ruling came down. For whatever reason I was almost singled in where I could live despite the fact that it wasn’t an issue before. I and our rehab program leader couldn’t get a straight answer and only surmised that the news papers interviewing our local LE scared them into briefly being “tough” as to not get backlash from the public. I never actually received any official or direct word to this sudden change for me and contact my lawyer. She was very surprised as the residency restriction in general was only supposed to apply to those on parole and not probation. She was willing to go to court with but luckily I found and purchased my current home which was approved by my PO.
Anyway…. I’m no longer on supervision but still don’t have a clear understanding how residency restrictions apply. My main concern is if I want to move again. Can I just openly look for a home or do I have to take some legal things into consideration? I don’t want to bother talked to the local PD as their understanding of RC’s and laws seems to be extremely limited (it often seems like the average cop has about the same amount of understanding of anything RC as the average user whaling in the comments section of an RC article).
If anyone officially knows the answer, I’d appreciate the comment.
These people really seem to be upset and in fear, just like the people in every town and city Janice has had to force to comply with the law. These people are really a tragic example of ignorance of the facts, and ignorance is a choice. I’ll spell it out;
1. Ignorance is the root of fear.
2. Fear is the root of anger
Ignorance=fear=anger. And when they lose their restriction laws they will be plenty mad.
So really, all the mental and emotional turmoil and panic they are experiencing is of their own making. It’s their own fault, not ours. They choose to not look at the fact’s to see if what they have been led to believe is really true. Their excuses for not doing their own research are really nothing more than euphemistic admissions of sloth/laziness.
these pompous people that are acting like walleyed goats are off the charts stupid , Its doubtful that most are really not fearful of anything other than sharing space with people that they feel they are superior , and really enjoy splitting hairs of the different kinds of RC’s , to further push their lame agenda , these people make me sick , with their twisted unfounded view , only going by what is plain to see is being fueled by law enforcement / hate & exstreamism , , I hope they all get hit hard in the pockets , I wonder how many are even from this state , sounds like a great place to let your dog take dump , turn it all into a dong poo colleting center at least it might create jobs and better air