ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Action Alert: Lobbying in Sacramento February 5 [details]

Monthly Meetings: Jan 26 – Los Angeles, Feb 23 – Berkeley, Mar 30 – San Diego [details]

Registration Laws for all 50 States

National

CT: Panel mulls changes to sex offender registry

Parents who check the state sex offender registry prior to allowing their children to knock on strangers’ doors and ask for candy this Halloween may be under the misconception that every person listed on the registry poses a grave danger to public safety. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. AJ

    Glory, glory, Hallelujah! Another State willfully (read: without a court mandating it) reconsidering its registry and laws. Awesome! To me, this shows that people are starting to look at the facts and are perhaps calming down from the hysteria created by Walsh, Book, and their ilk. There are some lines in the story worth remarks.
    *****
    “We’re not trying to make life easier for offenders,” said Alex Tsarkov, executive director of the Connecticut Sentencing Commission. “We’re trying to focus on public safety.”
    —–
    Spin it and package it however you want, dude, as long as the net result is a benefit to RCs.
    =====
    Contrary to popular belief, studies in Connecticut and elsewhere have shown that sex offenders are at lower risk of reoffending than most other criminals.
    —–
    Ahhh….once again, it’s good to see the truth being put out there.
    =====
    Some committee members opposed any change to the status of those currently on the registry, since victims consider the registry requirement a part of their sentencing.
    —–
    Hmm, so the victims themselves see registration as, “part of [] sentencing.” Gee, that sure sounds like punishment to me!
    *****
    All in all, I liked the tone of this article. It was actually pretty straightforward and factual–which *always* helps us, since everything has been built upon lies. I sure hope they go through with it (and maybe some of this sanity will spill across the 2nd District. NY, are you listening?!?)

  2. It doesn’t work

    “The board would classify offenders as low, moderate or high risk of reoffending based on a clinical risk assessment score, the nature and circumstances of the offense and the impact of the crime on the victim and community.”

    • It doesn’t work

      Good news that will Defiantly snowball into the Eventual demise of the registry. I chose that quote in my previous comment because damn, that is gonna be one giant cluster f%#k LOL. I hope they can get it all worked out and also funded so that it has a chance to pass. The civil service union will have to reassign all of the SORA employees.

  3. Paul

    “We’re not trying to make life easier for offenders,” said Alex Tsarkov, executive director of the Connecticut Sentencing Commission.

    So he agrees that this is punishment. Take note and use that in the next lawsuit.

  4. JoeM

    How does Connecticut currently treat out of staters? IIRC, both CT and RI classify them based on how the convicting state did, which means if you are from Cali, Florida, Alabama, etc, you get life no matter what. Similar deals in Maine and NH. That is a problem in a number of states. The only reasonable state in New England is Vermont. Massachusetts is semi-reasonable in that a 20 year person can petition to be removed after 10 years. The problem is that they won’t tell you what your classification will be until after you move to the state.

  5. John

    As a resident of this state, I won’t be holding my breath. I bet the requirements to be on the lowest tier are difficult to fulfill so I’d imagine that the majority of (ex)offenders will be placed in the middle and highest tiers. The registrant community will feel like they have some sort of hope but the community will still be able to discriminate against those listed. But I guess any forward movement is still movement.

  6. Michael

    If they move from an offense-based system to a risk-based registry, and let the governor choose the panel, you’ll have inconsistency due to political biases. How does that benefit public safety? Seems that would defeat the purpose.

    ….

  7. Jess

    In 1994, at the age of 18 (still considered a juvenile) my husband had sex with a minor. I believe she was 15 at the time. That fateful decision landed him in prison,in addition to a sexual assault conviction that has followed him ever since. After serving 2.5 years he was released. While he did his 2.5 years, he completed his GED, he took some training courses in prison, and had plans and desires to re-integrate back into the community. But lets face it, he was still a young man, figuring out life, and well if we can recall the 90’s involved, sex, gangs and drugs. Not fully understanding the consequences of his first sexual assault imprisonment, he continued to have reckless recreational sex until once again he found himself having sex with another female who too was under the age of 16.

    This being his second offense, his sentence was no longer 2-4 years, but I believe was told if he took it to trial he would be facing 25 years in jail. And so he plead guilty of sex with a minor, and was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

    Ive known my husband even before his first imprisonment. What he’s been guilty of and has been penalized is what so many young adults are guilty of, having recreational sex without knowing the age of the person. He’s not guilty of sex with a child, or having un consensual sex, but rather having reckless sex without confirming the age of the other participant regardless of how “of age” and “mature” they appeared to have been.

    My husband spent the remainder of his 20’s in prison. He served 9 years, was transferred multiple times, found himself in solitary for months at a time because, well who ever prepares a young man to prison life?

    After 9 years he is released, no parole, no probation, no supervision, but released out back into a society he’s been away from for 9 years. Here is a 32 year old man who is eager to change his life around and be a part of society only to have door after door be closed on him. 32 years of age, but still living with a 21 year old mentality. In 1998, while he was serving his sentence, CT enacted legislation mandating that the Dept of Public Safety establish and maintain a central registry of sex offenders, requiring that the information be made available to the public through the internet. With this registry now being publicly available to anyone and everyone, this deterred employers from hiring him. Employment was difficult to maintain because he was publicly shamed and as any human with the need to take care of himself, he fell back into the only way he knew to survive, and that was to sell drugs.

    He got arrested with possession with intent to sell and did a few months. He was released again into the community with no employable support only to be re-arrested again in 2011, and sentenced to 7 years in jail with 3 years special parole. He was released early in 2014, with 2 years parole following 3 years special parole, only to have be incarcerated for 6 months on a violation, and incarcerated another 12 months behind another violation. And what violations did he violate, using drugs.

    Because of his sex offender status, his parole is supervised by the special management unit. Because of his sex offender status, his previous drug abuse wasn’t “treatable” where he can be recommended to a rehab facility, but rather “punishable” because there weren’t facilities available to house him to treat him. Lets revisit this again. Jailed throughout your 20’s released in your 30’s with no reintegration support, to be imprisoned with new charges due to being unemployable, only to be re-released and still be unemployable, falling Into the comfort of numbing his reality to be re-incarcerated 2x more times for self medicating while escaping his reality.

    The special management unit has monitored him and supervised him for what reason exactly? So he doesn’t commit another sexual crime. He hasn’t committed a sexual “crime” in over 20 years. But when does the punishment end for him?

    Ive known my husband for 27 years, two years ago we married. I have seen, and lived through his struggles. Ive seen him spend countless hours completing applications online, passing assessments, landing interviews until they ask that dreadful question, have you ever been convicted of a sexual offense. Just yesterday he went to Goodwin College to enroll in there CNC certificate program, to be turned away as a student because of his sexual assault convictions. For goodness sakes, convicted murderers have more rights. So what is the state doing to help the 6152 registered sex offenders? Your Recidivism workgroups collaborate with so many state agencies except the most important one, The Department of Labor! What benefits does the state receive investing so much money with training ex felons for life in the outside when we assist employers in discriminating against them for employment opportunities. Out of the 6152, how many re-arrests could have been prevented if they were employed? How many re-arrests could have been prevented if they could be afforded the drug abuse treatment that was needed. How many re-arrests could have been prevented for non reporting housing compliance because they go from house to house, couch to couch under the radar because landlords discriminate too.

    I ask, please collaborate more with the dept of labor. Please work with companies and employers to take advantage of the work opportunity credit and federal bonding programs. Its inhumane to continue to treat these 6152 individuals the way society has. Please tell me how else I can help my husband not lose hope. The state wants to lower the recidivism numbers then the state needs to collaborate with the labor department, unions, employers and companies and show them the advantages of this eager population who is ready and waiting for there second chance.

    *I just wanted to add that my husband landed a second interview with the VP of company in Bloomfield on Monday. He felt the job was his only to be emailed yesterday, they are going to continue to interview other candidates.

    He recently drove from New Britain to Willimantic and scored higher than 70 on the manufacturing skills inventory assessment offered by the DOL and Cthires. However, I question again what good are these investments with training, and assessments when this registry continues to punish him, despite all the years served. This public shaming does nothing to those on the registry except force many to go back to a life of crime. My husband refuses to fall back to that life, but why does society make redemption impossible for so many who desperately just desire another chance at a clean life. Please help me, help him and so many others trapped in this endless yet avoidable prison revolving door.

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 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 *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *

Michael Dickson Womens Jersey