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

General News

General Comments August 2017

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of August 2017. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil.

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.  
 
475 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Mike R— Good Luck on Tuesday.

mike r: Okay, I finally put my nose to the grindstone and went over your doc. I’ve posted a PDF of it for you (and the whole world) to download at https://gofile.io/?c=h7KkMg. The link and doc will expire on Monday, August 28, so I hope you get it soon. (If not, I can do it again.) I apologize for my editorial style changing between start and finish. That’s what happens between late-night and midday! Well done, brother, and I hope it all goes well. P.S. There must be something wrong with me, because at one point I was wishing you… Read more »

Good deal AJ. I really appreciate your hard work. I know from experience that doing this type of editing can be very demanding. I will be sure to download tomorrow and make those changes. I also know what you mean about the formatting, I just couldn’t get it to format correctly when I copied and pasted on that site.

AJ, I cannot access the Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. in Snyder. Any help???? I accessed the Scotus Blog and there is no link to the brief you mention. It’s there but there’s no link…http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/snyder-v-doe/

@mike r:
Yeah, it appears the USSG amicus has been removed, at least from there. No worries, I’ve uploaded it, as well as the District Court decision (below the 6th Appeals) and one other Snyder doc. (https://gofile.io/?c=rAjxhp) These files will expire on the 31st.

BTW, this “gofile” website is pretty darned handy. Completely anonymous, free file posting and sharing, with no need to supply anything about yourself!

Wow frigging ten hours later. Well I made all the changes you suggested AJ.. Very good calls and I appreciate all the hard work and time you put into that. Lost the C&U and the involuntary/slavery part too . I totally agree with your analysis.

@Mike R

For claim 5 (Substantive) point 22, the code for the 2008 law requiring passports to be revoked for those committing sex tourism is:

Title 22 U.S. Code § 212a – Restriction of passports for sex tourism

I’m not done reading AJ’s edits, but so far what he did looks great!

@Mike R and @AJ I’ve finished AJ”s edits and agree. The sections he wants removed don’t hurt your chances of success if removed and allow the court to focus more on the big issues that are hard to strike down. Another thing to help in case you forgot your source like AJ mentioned: Separation of Powers/Bill of Attainder Line 18: The source for much of this claim is: http://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1058&context=plr Pepperdine Law Review 4-20-2010 Volume 37, Issue 4, Article 5 Are Bills of Attainder the New Currency? Challenging the Constitutionality of Sex Offender Regulations that Inflict Punishment Without the “Safeguard of… Read more »

Oh man I love this Gofile site..It shows my formatting and the works so when I get it completely revised tomorrow probably I will post it for all to see. You guys sure I should just let everyone have access to this? After all we put in the work and most of these guys have been doing nothing but bashing my effort and me personally..If either one of you, Chris or AJ say no I shouldn’t I’m not going to and I’ll send you the link privately somehow…It’s your guy’s call man because you put in a helllla lot of… Read more »

I definitely think you should release it to all. After all, the efforts that went into it go far beyond just me, AJ, and the others here that have contributed in some ways. The efforts are also all of the previous cases and research papers that we took information from as well as the admins and organizers of this web site. Some of our information was gathered from previous failures, and if somehow you releasing this to everyone spreads to helping one of those that failed, then their original failure but attempt at trying to fight the system wasn’t for… Read more »

@mike r: I don’t see there being a problem with posting it to gofile. You’ve already had it posted to your site for all to see anyway. Posting it to gofile lets you make and keep formatting for us to see, use, and suggest for editing. I sent my doc as a PDF for flattening and size purposes, keeping posts shorter on here, and having editorial comments stand out better. I think I’d stay away from letting the whole world have on-line editing capabilities. Too many fingers in there will get confusing…anonymous fingers, at that! That aside, I have yet… Read more »

Ok you guys once again I agree with every thing you have stated..One of my major concerns is the nefarious or unskilled editing of this doc and it getting submitted to a court in a flawed form before we have a chance to do it ourselves…I’m filing tomorrow or as soon as I complete it in the next couple of days since I have a ton of homework and obligations I must address this week….But If you guys say post it so be it…..I want people to be able to edit it and use it but I don’t want anyone… Read more »

Damnnn dude you can enable editing and the works. Anyone who gets this will be able to tweek it and make minor adjustments adding their particular situations and info and bam, go file it….Hmmmmi

I would like to read it once the edits are done, have read much of your work online and encouraged you along the way. I am certainly interested in the substantive due process argument since we are all individuals as stated by the constitution and should not be lumped together as one.

Alight…Here it is.. I put an expiration date for the 30th…If you guys see any changes that need to be made let me know by tomorrow because I’m filing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
https://gofile.io/?c=TABVi0

I fixed that last paragraph where it stated Declaratory and/or Injunction and any known/unknown legislation….Removed /or removed known/unknown………

Actually I fixed every where it stated and/or and changed it to just and where needed…also removed all known/unknown from the entire doc so disregard those….

I’ll read more tomorrow, but to start with:

#42 – You left in the Cruel & Unusual, Involuntary Servitude and Slavery parts even though those were removed from below. At least, I assume they were removed but haven’t gotten that far yet.

It really looks great, and I can’t wait to finish reading it.

@mike r:
I downloaded it, and will give it another good look-through. I have opened it and am strangely comforted by that court-required formatting. 🙂 (It does make for nicer, easier, marking and editing if printed out.)

Much nicer hey AJ??Actually court ready format, nothing left but a little touch up maybe and file it…and you assumed right Chris..no CaU no servtude issues cluttering it up..much cleaner and as the courts would say much more “cognizable”..I will do a search for CaU ane servitude and delete..look forward to your comments..

I just found a great resource for Due Process citations of SCOTUS cases. Unfortunately, it’s on Facebook and since many on here can’t use Facebook, just ask and if the moderators don’t mind I’ll post all 28 of them here or if someone can put them on another web page that would be great. https://www.facebook.com/GeorgiaCopBlock/posts/549161235195653 Here are a few examples of my favorites that pertain to us: 1. When a person of ordinary intelligence does not receive fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden, prosecution for such conduct deprives him of due process. U.S. v. Nevers, 7 F.3d 59… Read more »

@Mike R I’ve read through it once, and didn’t see anything major wrong. I’ll try to re-read it as I can. I think it’s the best filing I’ve seen even if it still has some repetition and flow issues. I wasn’t able to find in your filing a reference to the drop in housing value to those close to a sex offender. You may want to add that into your 1st challenge to reputation: Being on the registry draws the scorn of nearby residents due to the fact that home values drop as much as 12 percent within a tenth… Read more »

Mike – I offer these comments from my review of your doc. Mostly little clean up details but rather offer them up to you to consider instead of not. GREAT DOCUMENT OVERALL!! NICE WORK BY YOU AND YOUR ADMIN STAFF (@Chris F, AJ, et al) Overall, use law enforcement and not police since not all jurisdictions have police, but maybe sheriff department, etc Overall, is there a preferred document font and font size for this doc? Overall, you mention lines and their numbers, but don’t see any Are the reports referenced the latest? Want to avoid looking like cherry picking… Read more »

I, too, thought protectible was wrong, but then I did some research. It’s a word SCOTUS likes to use, and if Mike was quoting them, should continue to use it. (https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110903132651AA6s6RX)

Huh, learn something new everyday. ProtectIBLE it is! Just will be interesting to see if the CA Fed Judge knows it.

Yes, Alex, I will take SCOTUS words for $1000

Yeah, I learned it just this morning. Just like a learned about a year ago that the proper word for living together is “cohabit,” not “cohabitate.” Just when I thought I’d mastered this mother tongue, too…! (j/k) 🙂

Hey I hope if your going to take this to the CA courts you let us see what you do to it and collaborate with us on here…….We only get one chance with this crap in state and federal so it’s really important to all of us , as it is to you I’m sure, especially to me with all my hundreds (if not a thousand or more) hours in it and I am sure Chris and AJ would like to see it and maybe make suggestions or participate in some kind of collaboration on whatever you do with it…

I don’t know Chris that just seems a little irrelevant to me or this case just as the cost of the registry was from the Justice Institute. However, after mulling it around a little I have found a way to relate to me and how it is causing me harm.How does something like the following sound??? It is oppressive in that if I purchase a home that home will automatically lose value (as much as 12%)as soon as that address is used for registration and is added to the publicly accessible sex offender website. Therefore, the laws are oppressing (and… Read more »

@mike r:
I’m not a fan of adding the property-value argument. To me, it clouds the issue and in no way affects a fundamental right or liberty interest. Besides, there are any number of things that may affect one’s property values. New power lines installed near by, blighted homes, repeated police activity to homes, etc., would all have a similar (though perhaps lesser) effect.

I agree, it’s similar to the argument about how much the registry costs.

Of course the effect upon property values is a fundamental liberty interest. It can readily by argued as a government taking of the value of a home. That there are other influences upon property values does not in any way cloud the very real and tangible effect the presence of Registrants has upon them. Further, as I just pointed out in another post, this is one of the few collateral consequences of the Registry that affects neighbors rather than the Registrant himself (see that post for why it does not really affect the Registrant). This makes it an important element… Read more »

But would this feed the argument for residential restrictions based upon maximizing property values and also the argument of protecting some housing values with government residential restricted areas creating a Equal Protection disagreement for home owners?

There is no doubt that maintaining property values is one of the motivations behind residential restrictions. The Registry is a perfect example of government distortion of the marketplace, a marketplace in which lots of non-Registrants participate and in which many of those respond to a public Registry by cleverly lobbying government to keep Registrants out of their neighborhoods. No intelligent person really believes that the proximity of a school or a bus stop to the house of a sex offender represents a salient and legitimate concern rather, they know that by pretending to believe that it does effectively bars sex… Read more »

Hmmmmm, so, what I am hearing is by local governments passing potentially unconstitutional residential restrictions, they are violating Equal Protection Clause (EPC) by creating market winners and losers through unintentional housing market value manipulation based upon favorable locations, e.g. schools, which are always a top thing to seek when house buying? If so, then that would seem to be an argument pitting neighborhood v neighborhood and continuing to perpetuate the unfounded RC fear and hysteria through the need for residential restrictions? Yes? A court action waiting to happen perhaps based upon this premise? To reinforce this then would be for… Read more »

Yes, that makes sense provided we keep in mind that this would be a legal action to be brought by non-Registrants whose property values are affected (as a matter of standing).

But apart from legal actions it’s also a good shit-stirring point to try to cultivate amongst those non-Registrants.

“Of course the effect upon property values is a fundamental liberty interest.” I must have missed this one in the Constitution and in SCOTUS rulings. I would love to see you try to argue this being a fundamental right or a liberty interest. It may affect your pocketbook, but big deal (legally). SCOTUS has previously ruled there is no right to an occupation, which certainly affects one’s pocketbook. So I guess the value of one’s home is a liberty interest, but being able to hold down a job isn’t? Sure. “It can readily by argued as a government taking of… Read more »

Since when is the Bill of Rights a comprehensive laundry list detailing what the government can and cannot do to you? Fortunately, that is not how it works and also fortunately legal issues get revisited all the time by the Supreme Court. Regardless, the question of REGISTRANTS bringing a court case premised on these assertions of rights is not what I was referring to. I was talking about non-Registrants’ property values if you had read my earlier comments. Which renders all of this a bit silly: “Right, because the government compelled me to commit an offense, and the government compelled… Read more »

“Since when is the Bill of Rights a comprehensive laundry list detailing what the government can and cannot do to you? Fortunately, that is not how it works and also fortunately legal issues get revisited all the time by the Supreme Court.” Nowhere in my post did I even mention the Bill of Rights. I said Constitution and SCOTUS case law. Nor did I say anything about SCOTUS ever revisiting or changing course on anything. You stated, “of course” there is a fundamental liberty interest. I was–and am–curious from where this “of course” certainty arises or upon what constitutional or… Read more »

“Nowhere in my post did I even mention the Bill of Rights. I said Constitution and SCOTUS case law.” Liberties are secured and government’s powers are constrained by the Bill of Rights so you didn’t have to mention it in order for me to correctly refer to it as being an affirmation of our liberty. Say constitution, then. It doesn’t matter. Stop being captious. “Nor did I say anything about SCOTUS ever revisiting or changing course on anything.” You did say this: “SCOTUS has previously ruled there is no right to an occupation, which certainly affects one’s pocketbook. ” And… Read more »

“Liberties are secured and government’s powers are constrained by the Bill of Rights so you didn’t have to mention it in order for me to correctly refer to it as being an affirmation of our liberty.” Oh really? Where in the Bill of Rights is the ex post facto prohibition? Where in the Bill of Rights is the Bill of Attainder prohibition? Where in the Bill of Rights is the Full Faith and Credit Clause? Where in the Bill of Rights is the Privileges and Immunities Clause? Where in the Bill of Rights are the individual States compelled to provide… Read more »

Ok guys, as two of the most intelligent and best at researching issues that we have actively participating, I would like to request that you both put you differences aside and re-focus on the recent issues. 🙂

My usual research time is limited due to kids school starting, and I would love to hear some more about the Colorado impact and especially if someone can find what arguments the lawyer used and how we, and Mike R, can use it.

Hope your Labor Day weekends are going well!

Still waiting for that property valuation analysis.

See these posts where the author discusses, and in no way refutes, disputes, or dismisses, Registrants’ effects on property values:

https://all4consolaws.org/2017/08/general-comments-august-2017/#comment-184577 (“Your neighbors’ property values certainly will drop”)
https://all4consolaws.org/2017/08/general-comments-august-2017/#comment-184579 (“the very real and tangible effect the presence of Registrants has upon them.”)
https://all4consolaws.org/2017/08/general-comments-august-2017/#comment-184598 (“government is…only eroding value of particular properties”)
https://all4consolaws.org/2017/08/general-comments-august-2017/#comment-184600 (“discounted/Registrant-degraded market value of their property” & “SO discounted prices.”)
https://all4consolaws.org/2017/08/general-comments-august-2017/#comment-184745 (“non-Registrants whose property values are affected”)

So, how about those Clauses? Find them in the Bill of Rights yet?
How about that explanation of “fundamental liberty interest”? Or should I just expect more deflection and redirection?

As to your takings argument (BTW, the 5th Amendment doesn’t apply to the individual States in regards to takings), I refer you to Knox v Lee https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/79/457/case.html (affirmed in Omnia Commercial Co. v US https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/261/502/case.html and PA Coal Co. v Mahon https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/260/393/case.html): “[The Takings Clause in the Fifth Amendment] has always been understood as referring only to a direct appropriation, and not to consequential injuries resulting from the exercise of lawful power. It has never been supposed to have any bearing upon or to inhibit laws that indirectly work harm and loss to individuals.” SCOTUS went on to say, “A… Read more »

Mike, there is no reason why your property would lose any value at all. Your neighbors’ property values certainly will drop but, if you’re the only Registrant in the neighborhood, then there is no reason for someone to devalue YOUR property since any sale by you of the property would involve you LEAVING the neighborhood. Why should it be devalued? Indeed, one can easily argue that the value of your house should be ABOVE market rates given incentives your neighbors would have to buy you out to be rid of you and the negative effect upon their own property values.… Read more »

Chances are, they may not even know it either until they go to sell. That is market property value, not assessed property value for tax purposes too if I understand correctly.

Ha! Yes, that does raise the whole property tax issue, doesn’t it? I would imagine that there have already been homeowners arguing with jurisdictions about assessed values when they know that those do not match the discounted/Registrant-degraded market value of their property.

I have argued, some years ago, and only half-jokingly, that sex offenders should buy properties in neighborhoods, the first one of which is at market value and subsequent ones at SO discounted prices. Then sell all, starting with their registered home, at full market value.

Damn that’s a helllll of an idea you just stated…..I wonder if we could actually get investors to take that bait and run with it. tell them something like “If you buy me my house that I can own out right I will move in and you can then purchase the surrounding homes for discounted prices and then, bam, I’ll move out into the next one that you buy in a different neighborhood, I move in, you buy surrounding houses, I move out and into the next neighborhood and so on and so on…” Wow you maybe on to something… Read more »

In my experience, assessed values never are the same as market values, but usually lower always; thus creating a lower tax bill. I’d think an RC in the area could depress market value of homes, not the assessed value of a home using a government formula.

I am really glad to see that fix it list get smaller and smaller. I’m on it, see anything else let me know, I will wait till Thurs. to file to give you guys more time. If you have that cite for Packingham post it or I’ll look for it and post when I find it. I still have a ton of homework due tomorrow.

@mike r:
I’m picking through it still, but should have it done by tonight (Wed). I’ve mostly added commas where they help break of word flow. Looking good!

12 point font Times New Roman……

Texas Voices confirmed that a PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI with SCOTUS was filed and hoping to be accepted on the Residency Restriction issue in Lewisville TX. I know I’ve been very vocal about my displeasure with the decision of the lawyer to focus on only Procedural Due Process instead of Substantive, but it sounds like they have a good argument anyway. Either SCOTUS will realize Connecticut Department of Public Safety V Doe 2003 is a completely different situation and take the case, or they’ll use the excuse that it’s similar enough they don’t want to entertain another Procedural… Read more »

Well since Conn v dept. we have had Bani v Hawaii and Constantine which determined that Reputation is in fact a fundamental right and actually outline when that right was violated by stated that stigma alone was insufficient that you have to have the stigma plus standard. The right to reputation has always been my choice to include in a suit and luckily my suit has it… Can’t wait to get it in front of a judge….

Well, in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, one of the most backwards and most conservative court of appeals in the country, the court has ruled the following arguements against residency restrictions be dismissed with prejudice for someone not on parole or not on supervision and where a residency ordinance was adopted after a person committed a sex crime: the Ex Post Facto Clause of Article 1, Section 10 to the United States Constitution; the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment; the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; any civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and the… Read more »

lovewilprevail, Thank you for that info. I was not aware it was that bad here. Are there some cases I could look at so that I can see the arguments presented and how the judges came to those conclusions? I did think that Texas was one of the few states that did not allow ANY ex-post facto laws, including civil, so am curious what kind of reasoning they used to justify it. No wonder so many Texas issues end up going to SCOTUS compared to other states. It’s probably time for a full blown Bill of Attainder challenge here. I… Read more »

Chris F If you read the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals May 2017 decision in the Lewisville case that is attached to what was filed this week to the Supreme Court, you will find the constitutional arguements the court threw out with prejudice. The statement is on the last page or 2nd to last page of this attached opinion. As far as to the state expo fact, I do have a copy of that somewhere as I also want to read. I am very busy and it may be a few days for me to locate. Once located I will… Read more »

@Lovewilprevail Thanks. I’ve read the entire thing now and see what you mean. It looks like this entire thing bypasses all constitutional issues mainly due to the “frightening and high” sex offender recidivism lie from Mckune V Lile 2002 and Smith V Doe 2003. I’m not sure how that lie doesn’t get shot down since it’s been awhile since the Ira Ellman report debunked all that. I don’t see how it survived Equal Protection though. It clearly allows sex offenders lucky enough to have requested a judge defer the 1000 foot restriction on probation to avoid this, yet those that… Read more »

Okay, unless someone sees some obvious flaw I am going to go print today and file Thurs. or Fri.

Just a thought, but would it be best to let the final comments come in, incorporate them, let it sit over the weekend without looking at it, give it one last glance Tuesday before printing to file? I know you want to print and file, but 106 pages is a lot of printing. I can see also filing it to let it start the process and get a sense of relief too once it is filed. Just two trains of thought. In the end, it is you who has to do it, so folks here will back you either way.… Read more »

248. First, most sex offenders are subject to tremendous scorn and shame that is associated with meeting the legislative requirements for sex offenders, whether the sentiment flows from the community being notified when they enter a new area, from being publicly displayed on the World Wide Web (which is the new public square),see Packingham v North Carolina 582 U.S. at 8 (2017) “By prohibiting sex offenders from using those websites, North Carolina with one broad stroke bars access to what for many are the principal sources for knowing current events, checking ads for employment, speaking and listening in the modern… Read more »

@mike r: Here’s the link of the document after I went through it again (https://gofile.io/?c=ZwK1JT, expires 9/3/17). It’s mostly the addition of commas, as well as some apostrophes and quotation marks. There are also some word changes suggested, and some noun-verb argument corrections. I agree that setting it aside for a couple days, then doing a slow, thorough re-read may be wise. Quite often, one will find items that merit or warrant changing. In agreement with what “anonymous” (it sure would be nice is s/he gave us a moniker to use…hint, hint) mentions, you have my support and encouragement whatever… Read more »

Only the shadow knows…..

Henceforth, thy name shall be “The Shadow”! 🙂

U.S. District Court Considers Legality of 2-for-1 Order By Gary L. Visscher, Esq The May 2017 newsletter reported on President Trump’s “two-for-one” Executive Order (E.O. 13771), and litigation challenging the Executive Order which was filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. E.O. 13771 requires that an agency or department which proposes or promulgates a new regulation must identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed, and requires that the cost of any new regulation must be off-set by repeal of other regulations, so that the “total incremental cost of the new regulations… to be finalized this year… Read more »

I wonder how Registered Citizens in TX are dealing with evacuations and registration issues during all of the flooding. I looks as it will be awhile before many will get to go home. Some police departments are flooded, so they won’t be able to handle annual registrations or updates. I doubt TX will offer any leniency to registrants. If anyone knows how this is being handled, please advise us. I would imagine that this is a stressful situation to be in especially if it isn’t clear what registrants need to do to stay in compliance with the many regulations we… Read more »

Funny you brought this up. I am from Texas and was thinking exactly the same thing yesterday. I have seen nothing in the media here in Texas concerning this issue.

You won’t see it in the TX media either. It would only create hysteria and fear at a time when they need people calm. (Bad enough the registry does that) Enough people are in shelters as is for the near term until they can get home or another place to stay, so wondering if anyone around them is an RC would be counterproductive all things considered.

I live in the Dallas area. My city has a number to call for me to set up an appointment to register. As long as I call that number before my date comes up I have fulfilled my obligation to attempt to register with them. Normally, they call me back and schedule me within a month or so to come in. I make sure my phone keeps my initial call in its logs just in case. Of course, if they didn’t call back in a week I would call again. I won’t risk not looking like I tried. As for… Read more »

Well I’m shocked to hear that TX (or just your County) will pause the clock as long as you have an appointment to register. CA is much stricter about having to complete your registration 5 days prior or after your birthday. Sometimes they might fudge the registration appointment by a day when it helps with their schedule, but usually they stick to the 10 day time span. I really think they should change it to 10 days prior to or after your birthday. There is no real justification for such a tight time span to complete our annual registration. But… Read more »

Chris F, one problem with what you stated. In Texas you must in person at least 7 days before you move appear in person where you register to tell when and where you are moving or you are in violation subject to criminal penalties. So if you are homeless or not and where you stay is under water and you can not be back within 6 days, then you have no choice but to move without giving the at least 7 day in person notice. I would not be surprised to see law enforcement and DAs file criminal charges. But… Read more »

If this is the one thing HPD et al worry about at this time, then their heads are not on straight. People are dying, including one of their own. Check on residences later. Right now, help the populace in general.

I believe a judge would throw this out and laugh at the DA even in Houston or next door in LA for that matter too, which is flooding. Wait. Maybe not, this is the Bible belt where things are tougher all over.

Wouldn’t it be an easy work around though?

Just don’t commit to a permanent “residence” and visit whatever place you want to until you can fulfil the 7 day prior requirement?

Are the legal definitions so detailed that this loophole wouldn’t work?

Chris F, that will not work. Think about it. Before the flood, one is registered at some location, even if homeless. As soon as you are gone from that location for more than 6 days, does not matter where and how many other places you stayed, even if less than 7 days at each of those locations, you are considered to be living elsewhere from where you registered. And if you did not give the at least 7 day in person notice of where you now are staying, you just violated Chapter 62 and are subject to criminal penalties including… Read more »

@Lovwilprevail, I’ll respectfully have to disagree because of two sections of Chapter 62. Art. 62.055. CHANGE OF ADDRESS; LACK OF ADDRESS. (a) If a person required to register under this chapter intends to change address… The key word is “intends”. Flood victims did not intend on changing their address 7 days before a flood they didn’t know was coming. Art. 62.051. REGISTRATION: GENERAL. (a) A person who has a reportable conviction or adjudication … shall register or, if the person is a person for whom registration is completed under this chapter, verify registration as provided by Subsection (f), with the… Read more »

You know, I forgot about the word “intends”, so you do have a good point. But you would most likely first be arrested, charged and then have to prove to the court you did not intend to move. Maybe I am too pessimistic in what I believe law enforcement and DAs will do, but then maybe again I am not. I guess if flooded out, you could say you were on vacation temporarily while my place of residence was flooded. Hopefully, there will no issues for the people in south and southeast TX regarding this issue. And speaking of your… Read more »

Civilly sue the Sheriff and DA for wrongful prosecution and incorrect law enforcement (despite SCOTUS saying LEOs don’t need to know the law they are trying to enforce) and force a settlement to cover all legal expenses plus damages.

Sorry, Chris, will not work. You have to register initially so you are then registered somewhere. So once you are registered, you have a registered location. So then after that the 7 day in person notice applies.

Help me understand though. I’ve put in the relevant sections of Chapter 62 to both residency and traveling within Texas.

I live in Dallas. If I want to go to San Antonio for 4 days and then directly to Austin for 4 days, you are saying I’m violating our registration laws because I’ve been away from my official “residence” for more than 6 days, but that’s not true. The law says nothing about a timeframe that I must be at my claimed place of residence, only that I must also register somewhere else if I stay there too long.

Chris, you’re technically right according to how the law is written. There is nothing that says if you’re not living at your residence for 7 days that you’re considered to have changed residences. And there’s no limitation at all on how long you can be away from your residence before it’s considered not your residence anymore. Like you pointed out, all the triggering events are when you’re actually physically somewhere else for a certain amount of time not physically away for a certain amount of time. But equally, there’s also nothing to prevent law enforcement from assuming that your absence… Read more »

Actually, this is the one issue where a registrant could actually get in trouble in Texas because the registrant has to notify the registration office where they currently reside 7 days BEFORE they change residences, and then notify the new residence location within 7 days after they have made the change. It’s the 7 day notice BEFORE changing residencies that usually gets people violated as it’s the only obligation that occures BEFORE an event, everything else is after.

Does anyone think LEOs are doing compliance checks right now? Besides, who are they to say you weren’t there? “I’m surprised you didn’t find me, officer. I was the one wearing the water wings, treading in place over where my shopping cart and sleeping bag are.” I’d keep registering the same address, even if it’s under water. Just because you weren’t at your mooring when the LEOs came by doesn’t mean you moved…nor can they prove you did.

AJ, Just fyi concerning compliance checks in Texas. There is nothing in the state law requiring compliance checks. I have also obtained via a public information request the state agency rules regarding sex offenders and there no rules requiring the state or any law enforcement agency to do home compliance checks. So, no state law and no agency rules which were authorized by the legislature to do home compliance checks. The only rules pertain to Internet Id notifications, which the 2016 Texas criminal defense attorney of the year has stated are unconstitutional. They just have not been ruled that way… Read more »

Forget registration…. how about life and death? Are they allowed in shelters? Apparently not so in FL. Or is this old news?

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/us/sex-offenders-kept-from-storm-shelters.html?mcubz=0

And how about Federal loans? SBA is ramping up to process thousands of loans in the aftermath of Harvey. Aren’t those convicted of sex (and only sex) offenses against minors categorically excluded?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rohitarora/2017/08/28/sba-is-ready-to-help-victims-of-hurricane-harvey-with-disaster-loans/#46c837d668f1

If you have been convicted of a forcible or nonforcible sexual offense, AND you are subject to an involuntary civil commitment upon completion of a period of incarceration for that offense, you cannot receive a Federal Pell Grant.

https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/eligibility/criminal-convictions

I think that once you are released from civil commitment, you would be eligible for grants or loans again.

Alright AJ I have already changed a lot of those mistakes and I will go over it tomorrow and finish fixing the rest that you have pointed out.. Great job dude I am really impressed with your consistent help and your dedication to this. You and Chris have been really instrumental in helping get this to the masterpiece that it is today….It really is powerful and I don’t think any professional attorneys could have done any better….Except one of the scrotus judges, maybe. So ya, I’ll fix it up and post it and let it sit till next Tues. before… Read more »

Well, I went ahead and stayed up all night and fished our motion. Here’s the link…
https://gofile.io/?c=IziPcR#69268
It’s up until the fifth so everyone can see it and have a chance to comment or download a copy for themselves.
Thanks for the grammar and punctuation lesson AJ, I really needed it since I am going to be starting my English 301 next semester..Seriously though, thanks, I know you had to have spent a lot of time doing that….

AJ I just want to make sure you understood I really meant thanks for the English lesson I learned a lot about punctuation and proper grammar from your revisions. I think my post sounded a little sarcastic our something I want to make sure you understood I really meant thanks for sharing your knowledge, you’re very articulate and have been instrumental in making this as comprehensive as possible..

@mike r:
All’s good, brother. Mind you, I can get a bit “comma happy” at times, but I tried to exercise restraint in your document. 🙂

If you haven’t already, I stronly recommend buying the latest edition of “The Elements of Style” by Strunk & White. It’s been the go-to resource since 1918, though updated as time has gone by. Also, you may want to learn what an “Oxford comma” is. It’s no big deal and simple to grasp, but it can significantly change how something is understood. (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/us/oxford-comma-lawsuit.html?mcubz=0)

Take That, AP Style! Court of Law Rules The Oxford Comma Necessary

https://thewritelife.com/is-the-oxford-comma-necessary/

LMFAO…..That gave me a good chuckle….Stupid little crap that can make a person laugh…..

Make sure you guys read down to the last post for the latest revision….

fished…lol..this auto correct needs some traing or updating or something…

@Mike R Mike, the discussion above about the drop to house prices was getting a little long, so I’ll continue it again here so it doesn’t get lost. My reason for you including it isn’t for your personal loss in home value, but the loss of your neighbors. It makes a huge point in your right to reputation argument and points to why the people want to banish you. Perhaps something like this added to your 1st challenge to reputation: Being on the registry draws the scorn of nearby residents due to the fact that home values drop as much… Read more »

Good point there on housing values relative to RCs

Hey AJ.. I know this maybe a stupid question but you, or someone, mentioned plagiarism, Is it absolutely necessary for a private citizen to cite every source is they use the language verbatim? I know it’s definitely good practice, and that it’s especially necessary in college or academic papers, but can I be sued, can the court use that against me in some way, what are the consequences if I quote in court docs verbatim without quotations and citing???? I found a great source about sex offenders and homelessness, http://ir.library.louisville.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3153&context=etd and I want to cite something like the following, which… Read more »

Man, this is an incredible paper with an abundant amount of solid citing. I want to include the whole thing in my motion, but I think I will just cherry pick some of the highlights with their accompanying sources….

@mike r: I would guess it’s more “bad form” than anything for which you’ll get in trouble. I know you’ve pulled from a number of sources without citation; my concern where I mentioned plagiarism was that it just read too slick and smooth and screamed of being lifted without attribution. My thought is that if you have the citation source at hand, use it. Legal papers, including the one you’ve posted, almost always have a “Recommended Citation” on the cover page, giving you what to use. I say use it when you can. But would I worry my whole case… Read more »

Yep, hold up because I am revising it once again with this new info..I have it done I just have to go through and change the lines that I reference to…That sounds a lot better Chris..It can’t hurt..

@mike r In this doc, since you are doing it and credibility of doing pro se is on you, defer to citing sources and quoting them appropriately, even if it is not an exact citation in the end. I have read a fair amount of legal docs that are chunked up with citations in the middle of the paragraphs, but still get the point across. Like the Oxford comma point, defer to it instead of not. Same should be done with citations and quotes. Keep in mind, this doc becomes part of the public record with your name on it.… Read more »

Man it is amazing how much a like we think…I was driving to scool and was thinking, hmmm, I bet that when I win this thing I can probably sue someone, somehow, like with a motion for summary judgement , for damages…

My Annual is coming up and have to call in advance to have an appointment. I did so and asked a question over the phone, “Is it possible to come into the station days before the appointment to pick up the paperwork so I can fill it out at home? That way I don’t have to wait as long.” I was told no. The hour scheduled for me was to process the paperwork. Then I was told that if I wanted to come earlier, then I can do that and fill out the paperwork. I’m lost here. This is supposed… Read more »

I’m with you on the feelings this brings up. I hate my birthday now. Sorry you have to go through this. So far I’ve been lucky and my annual is a fairly quick process. It usually takes about 15 minutes. I try to schedule for the first appointment and usually only need to initial the usual line points. Everything else I just confirm if there was any changes and that’s it.

@ New Person ,,,, , maybe if you go in early and get a chance to talk to a few people . that may have the same birthday or close to it , maybe talk about making plans for coffee of something , and who knows maybe you can help each other by going with each other on what ever appointment’s you draw every year , so your not alone on each others appointment’s . and your talking with friend rather than feeling so much of the reliving factor , and make a big deal out of when finished you… Read more »

Great idea, kind of living. We could also do some sort of silent action at the registering office, upside down flags, Acsol shirts, I don’t know.

I like the ACSOL shirts idea. It will appear on each of our Megan’s Law pages we occupy. I also like the idea of having a shirt which is a screen capture of the Megan’s Law website which we are not supposed to visit. That boggles the imagination.

@ Timmr and David Kenderly , the shirts are a great idea ! matter of fact that’s going to happen:)

3x LT please

Hey, you got a design? I could get some made for the next meeting. I just had my annual a couple months ago, but next year.

Sure, I’ll do it in Illustrator.

I like the concept of throwing it back in there faces with a bit of mockery. A good slogan for a T-Shirt idea would be ” What Registry Are You On?” emblazoned on the front or back. It draws people’s attention but isn’t too specific to sex related stuff. It implies that everyone is either on a registry or going to be on a registry eventually. We need to raise people’s awareness about registries in general and how easily they or their loved ones too, could be put on one.

That would be a good message to see on the mugshot.

@ Timmer ,,, , one idea I have had for a T shirt , to get donations or whear . On the back of the T Shirt you have a motorcycle riding off into a sunset with a big fat tire and the he or she is riding it says ACSOL on their vest , but over the top of the over picture you have a rocker that says LIVE FREE OR DIE , and the bottom of the Pic the rocker it would say ACSOL ,,,,,, to me it would be very important to that one depicting a women… Read more »

In our sheriff’s office they do a lot of stuff, including taxi licenses. I don’t want to embarrass myself and others by shouting out “who here is a registrant?” I thought I could get some t shirts made, maybe ACSOL could help out with the cost. Then I could bring them to the San Diego meeting and ACSOL could sell them for the full price and keep that amount as a donation.

Continued- We must get beyond the fear of what others think. That’s the hidden power of the registry right there.

@ Timothy Moore<<<< who said anything about shouting any thing out ? simply pay attention to the forms being handed out , as well as people asking for 290 registry forms , maybe if one is sporting a cool t shirt RC folks will approach you , always be aware of what is going on around you ,

I do pay attention, but I don’t want to out an RC or approach a gang or narcotics registrant, who writes “to register” on the check in form in the “purpose for visit” column. Wearing a t shirt maybe saying something only a registrant might appreciate like “PRICE CLUB MEMBER SINCE 2000.” Or maybe COMPLIANCE CHECK THIS, followed by a graphic of the middle finger, might invite some conversation.

Timothy Moore ,,, ,, the gift of gab go’s a long way . I don’t know the layout of your cop shop , all seem to not all seem to be the same , but I can glance at a form and see who is who , as well as see if one may be open to chit chat , as well as seeing the tension we all no so well , I always say hi and go out of my way to be friendly to the tense and the open the door to chit chat

Some don’t even know what price club day means , registry’s are unconstitutional will grab the eye of RC’s even if disconnected from internet , we cant just take for granted that every RC knows about ACSOL or issues , many don’t even have a home at all , staying under a million dollar bridge , or someone’s back porch dose not constitute being home , more people need to know whats going on and open a channel , all the more reason for RC community’s , giving voice and structure , less chance of stupid registry violations ,

@Timothy Moore ,,, ,,, and its great that your going to the meeting and all , but I am trying to think of ways to turn a negative situation like the price club day into a positive by informing others about ACSOL , as well as get them active here , and as far as being embarrassed go’s , I would never embarrass anyone , my intent is to end the embarrassment by helping RC’s fight on even the smallest scale of being active , while it is comfortable and convenient to go to a meeting and sell t shirts… Read more »

It seems to all depend on the city/department you register in I guess.

I don’t have to fill out anything in Texas. I either show up 90 minutes early, and get out in about 30 minutes of my appointment, or spend 2-3 hours waiting if I get there at my scheduled time.

They each punish us with the method they choose I guess.

Somewhere on this site, in one of the comments, I read that someone said that city ordinances can be made up by an individual city like speed limits, etc. The difference is that speed limits would apply to EVERYONE though, and not just a select group. Imagine if they say that only women have to obey the speed limit, and nobody else.

Okay. here it is.. I am not adding anymore, it is incredibly time consuming and arduous to do the line referrals. I will fix any grammar or punctuation if anyone points them out otherwise……….It’s a wrap o amigo…….
https://gofile.io/?c=uBVp83
I also figured out to add to my website, ( comma– LOL..) which I will do soon….

@mike r

Paragraph 51, I will continue to lead, not I wish to continue to lead

One is wanting something, the other is something you already have, which is control to lead

@mike r My comments offered off of the last upload you did last night: Overall, uniform paragraph left margin formatting needed across the doc Overall, I see what appears to me is underlining of some cited/referred to court cases and not some underlining of cited/referred to court cases. I believe the correct format is underlining them, but whatever you do, needs to be uniform. My vote, underline Paragraph 13, California municipalities (an extra l is on the end of California) Paragraph 51, I will continue to lead, not I wish to continue to lead –One is wanting something, the other… Read more »

Where are you located Newperson? I am in Sac. and I have never had to make an app. I know what you mean though about the reliving and waste of time and all that though..It does take at least two or three hours here…
I also posted the motions link to Sosen. See if I get any comments from Will or Derek….I would really like to here from Janice and team, but if not oh well….I still appreciate the platform….

Mike,

Good luck. Although I disagree with some of your beliefs it doesn’t mean your hard work isn’t appreciated. Many kudos to all of those who worked with him. If I can offer any real life instances where families, specifically kids, are also punished let me know.

Steve… I am so glad to hear your positive response brother….It’s us against them man.. United we stand and you know the rest….Much love to all my brothers in arms, no matter what conflicting ideals we may have……I am telling you the writing is on the wall, the registry is coming down and we are going to bring it down in CA………..Watch, I would almost bet my first born on it, definitely bet anything else in this world on it , including my own life, because that is exactly what I am doing you know……….You ever watch the civil rights… Read more »

Wow!

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2017/08/31/sex-offender-registry-constitution/

A federal court judge in Denver has called the public sex offender registry in Colorado “cruel and unusual punishment.”

This must be a first!

Double Wooooow. Chris……I think I have to reconsider my CaU issue….

They also won the challenge to Substantive Due Process!

Let’s continue the discussion under the comments for the news post since the moderators added it now.

https://all4consolaws.org/2017/08/co-judge-finds-colorado-sex-offender-registry-unconstitutional/

There is a link to the judge’s decision which is AMAZING to read, and includes tons of quotes you could use. I’ll talk more over there.

This is just stunningly beautiful:

“Federal judge holds Colorado registry is punishment; violates Eighth Amendment”

https://narsol.org/2017/08/federal-judge-holds-colorado-registry-is-punishment-violates-eighth-amendment/

Calling a Spade a Spade: Understanding Sex Offender Registration as Punishment and Implications Post-Starkey.

http://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1036&context=olr

This was a good read. Covers all the basic constitutional issues with sex offender laws. Has a long list of citations.

I’m liking the T shirt ideas lol.
If there’s a way to get behind a push to dismantle the Registry in CO I’m on board. I will show up to protest, or whatever it takes.
I also find it odd that the Tiered system idea was reborn shortly after the State was FORCED to update everyone’s information. Tiered or Not…it’s unconstitutional.
I’m All for closely monitoring those that have the capacity to pose a danger to society, but that is Literally What Probation/Parole is for!!! 3-5 years of it! In some cases More!
P.S Mike r, I gotchur back.

Alright man, short and sweet CaU added…
https://gofile.io/?c=vgt6xm
It is up until the 5th……… Ignore the underlines, I removed them instead of going through the entire thing trying to find every web addresses……………………

475
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.