ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings [details]
9/15 – Berkeley, 10/13 – W. Sacramento (date change), 10/20 – Los Angeles

Emotional Support Group: (Los Angeles): 8/24, 9/22, 10/27, 11/24, 12/22 [details]

Conference Videos Online7/14 Meeting Audio

General News

General Comments January 2018

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of January 2018. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil.

Join the discussion

  1. TS

    Made by minors, shared by many minors (some young adults) of both genders in Denmark. Interesting comments.

    1,000 Danish youths face charges for sharing 15-year-olds’ sex videos

  2. David Kennerly, Just A Bit Of Concentrating In the Camp

    “Tulare County inmate attacked, bit fellow inmate” Except that that “fellow inmate” was an elderly, civilly-detained Hosprisoner from Coalinga who was in the Visalia County Jail for a local court appearance.

    • David Kennerly, Just Doing A Bit Of Concentrating In the Camp

      We should consider contacting Visalia jail or local officials to protest a vulnerable inmate having been placed (deliberately?) with a known-violent offender.

  3. David Kennerly, Just Doing A Bit Of Concentrating In the Camp

    Coalinga State Hospital: I called the administration this morning and asked when the Detainees’ rights to make and receive phone calls would be restored. I was told by a staffer that they have no idea when that would be. One thing they accomplish by doing this is preventing Detainees from calling the press to report on the “near-riot” conditions said to exist there by the local media. My guess is that it is less of a riot and more of a widespread refusal to “program,” (along with a few broken windows and some garbage thrown about) as the staff likes to call it. Mike St. Martin, a particular annoyance to them, and who is a main conduit for information coming out of CSH, is unable to embarrass them when the phones are cut-off. It’s entirely conceivable that he is the main reason for their cutting off the phones. Attorneys trying to call in are no more successful than the rest of us.

    • AJ

      @Nakedly Driven:
      Depending on how your conversation with the staffer went, they gave a de facto statement that they are abridging rights. If you asked about rights, and the staffer didn’t instead refer to them as privileges, well….

      • David Kennerly, Driving While Nude. Specifically, a golf cart in Sun City

        It’s my word against a state robot. The robot always wins.

    • Tim Moore

      What if a hundred of us called in at once? Possible? Maybe, if we had a rapid response system.

  4. I'm Moving

    Hello everyone,

    I am currently on parole in Kern County, but I am in the process of having my parole moved to Sacramento County, and more specifically around the Galt and Lodi portion of Sacramento County. I’m just wondering if anyone here has dealt with Sacramento County while on Parole and if you have any thoughts or advice.

    Kern County has been backward and difficult for the last few years, and even my Parole officer is hopeful that things will be better in Sacramento. Here’s to hoping.


  5. Friendly Advice


    To those registrants who have school aged children. Make sure you know what your local laws say about registrants on school campuses. For example, some jurisdictions require you to have a child enrolled in a school AND written permission from the school principle in order to be on campus – even if you’re only dropping off or picking up. Some schools are now utilizing the Raptor Identification Management system. This system would require any school visitors to scan a government issued ID into their computer. The computer then extracts the name and photo and cross references it with the national database of sex offenders, as well as certain other databases depending on how the school set up the system. If it finds a match to the name or photo it alerts the operator and potentially even law enforcement. This is obviously a time and date stamp that puts you on school grounds. I’ve read posts on here with certain individuals saying that nothing will stop them from being involved with their child’s education – I get it. But ask yourself, is it worth the risk? I’m sure someone is making a lot of money for developing this system which thrives off of fear mongering and the well known public hysteria regarding sex offenders. For more info you can search

  6. David Kennerly, Barely Allowed Out-Of-Doors

    “As small riots rage at Coalinga State Hospital, details begin to emerge”

  7. David Kennerly, Barely Allowed Out-Of-Doors

    “Coalinga State Hospital locked down in sex offender dispute”

    What the hospital is doing is blaming it all on “child pornography.” Janice is quoted in this piece.

    • New Person

      Wow. So this is retribution for voting?

      Also, if this hospital isn’t a prison, then why are the patients being treated like they’re in prison. Lock down. That’s only a term you usually hear in prison, not hospitals.

      • David Kennerly, Barely Allowed Out-Of-Doors

        In most respects, it’s indistinguishable from prison. One of the few differences is that they can actually receive phone calls in their housing units. At least, when the phones are not turned off entirely as they have been since this past weekend. Also, it seems that the cops inside of the buildings are unarmed. There are none of the interior gun towers, along with the signs with which we became familiar while in prison i.e. “No Warning Shots Fired.” However, their perimeter security and movement into and out of the facility are all conducted by Department of Corrections officers who are armed. Escaping Detainees are to be shot down just as with CDCR prisoners. Any trips for medical purposes (increasingly rare) are conducted with a number of armed CDCR officers for every Detainee, including chase cars, and require all of the shackles used on prisoners. I cannot reconcile the status which they are said to possess, i.e. to be held in the least-restrictive means possible, with their present reality in which every aspect of their lives is tightly controlled and in which their living standards are kept at a level measurably worse than is found in most prisons. It’s not just niceties, either. Their medical care is atrocious and there have been many unnecessary deaths at CSH. It’s a scandal which, to date, continues to get worse. Their diet is absolutely horrible and hosprisoners attest to the food being worse than in prison. For any of us who’ve been to prison, that’s saying a lot.

  8. E

    Maybe more differences than similarities to RC laws (and it’s a year old) but I sure like his conclusion. Maybe he could speak at the National conference?! 🙂

    “When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.”

  9. ReadyToFight

    Immigrants in Cali have more rights than we do. This is sad.

  10. mike r

    Not only that, but criminal illegal aliens have more rights and more legal resources at the expense of our tax dollars then we have…Then they get convicted, deported and return while never being subjected to parole or probation or a hit list.

    • ReadyToFight

      Thanks Mike, that’s what I meant to say. I’m really sick of all this.

  11. mike t

    So much for getting out of these miserable states and retiring in Belize. Some poor old sod was extradited back to the U.S. for not de-registering when he left his home state to move to Belize, which they determined was actually an illegal move by the Gooberment. But, now he’s been civilly committed indefinitely while serving a bogus term and the fourth circuit claims that that’s legal even though the charge that got him committed was determined illegal. Try to wrap your head around this one.

    • kind of living

      @ Mike T ,,,,, ,, hmmm , makes me wonder if this will yet go to a higher court ,

  12. David Kennerly's Spectral Evidence

    I tried to call Mike St. Martin at CSH today having understood that their phone service would be restored in the afternoon. A staff member answered the phone, something which has never happened before as these are phones in the residential units that have only ever been answered by Detainees. He asked my name and then said that, unless I was a lawyer, I would not be able to speak with patients. Here is CBS coverage of the suspension of Detainee’s rights today: [note that this whole situation has been re-framed by CSH as an anti-porn initiative] "Psychiatric hospital locked down after crackdown on "porn epidemic"

    • David Kennerly, Barely Allowed Out-Of-Doors

      Here’s another story from the L.A. Times in which they manage to misrepresent the real issues of this story as well as Internet access for Detainees. In fact, Detainees have never been allowed Internet access. And, as with all of the news coverage of this story, they are uncritically reframing this as an anti-child porn issue. So CSH has got this one going their way, I’m afraid. “Unrest at state psychiatric hospital after crackdown on electronics: Patients were viewing child porn”

      • kind of living

        @ David ,,,,, ,, dirt bag state players , twisting the law as always , you can bet the press will help all they can

    • The Static-99R Is A Scam

      David (and others),

      I’ve been reading a lot of your Coalinga “Hospital” posts and I searched YouTube for a documentary. I don’t know if you’ve seen this one, but this was done by the BBC a few years ago:

      They, the “patients,” really have it bad. As I was watching the documentary the other night, I did two Google searches to find out how the two that were ultimately released were doing. As the documentary was done about 10 or so years ago, I was shocked to learn that the two were taken back into custody: one recommitted, the other re-incarcerated for a new charge. (Before he was released, the one who was recommitted had himself chemically, then physically castrated. Wow, that is quite the step to attain freedom!)

      Why do you think the two who were released could not make it in society? I finished watching the documentary with really confusing feelings as to what better could be done?

      • David Kennerly, Barely Allowed Out-Of-Doors

        Louis Theroux was the host of the BBC documentary about Coalinga and I’m very familiar with it and the way it was conducted. The Detainees highlighted were hand-picked by Hospital staff to best represent their own interests. Theroux was utterly contemptuous of those civilly detained and eager to accommodate the Hospital party line. He had no interest in talking with Detainee-activists such as Mike St. Martin and shut down that perspective entirely. You should know that those who “join treatment” are more likely to re-offend than those who do not. This is a basic division within any of these civil commitment programs: those who will join treatment and those who will not. I could go on at greater length about the outcomes of people released as well as the terrible post-incarceration programs that those lucky enough to get out (from treatment) must endure after leaving. Those who get out “through the courts” no longer have to be supervised by the state and tend to stay out of the system from that point forward. You need to keep in mind that everything that the media says about “sex offenders” is completely weighted against us. This is no less true of the BBC than American media. The BBC is fairly horrid in this regard. Only now are we beginning to see emerging signs of greater honesty in media portrayals of sex offenders but it’s still very rare. Grain of salt.

        • The Static-99R Is A Scam

          Thanks for your response David. I found the 26:00 mark of the documentary (link above) particularly unsettling. At the 26 minute mark, you can see how controlling the “treatment” can be when you see “Dr.” Deirdre D’Orazio refusing to leave the interview between the BCC and the “patient.” The patient does seem to have a very valid point: What was the reason to have D’Orazio present but to control and chill the patient’s free speech to the media? And you seem to be right, David, regarding Louis Theroux being “utterly contemptuous of those civilly detained and eager to accommodate the Hospital party line.” Theroux simply dismisses the patient and looks at D’Orazio as if the patient doesn’t even speak English — when in fact, the patient does have a point! The interview was between the patient and BBC, with D’Orazio not even having been the primary clinician. Then D’Orazio, in what seems to be an attempt to twist the narrative (and in true shady government agent fashion), begins to describe the patient’s behavior as having been “abusive and aggressive” when the patient was merely expressing what he was feeling. WTF.

          A few minutes before, at 17:15, it looks as though perhaps Coalinga selected a particularly aggressive patient. A patient who wasn’t even in treatment. Yet though this patient was not in the treatment, what was the reason for having D’Orazio present but to (again) control and chill the patient’s free speech?

          Above all is the fact that the patients are all people who have already served their prison sentences. If I am not mistaken, had it not been for Kansas v. Hendricks — a slim 5-4 decision — much of Coalinga would be unconstitutional. There is definitely something wrong when almost all patients do not make it out alive.

          Also, you mention Mike St. Martin. Could St. Martin not approach the BBC cameras when they were present so that he can be interviewed? Or did Coalinga “Hospital” keep the BBC within a confined area of the institution that did not have activists like St. Martin present?

        • David Kennerly, I Stopped At Harris' Ranch & Was Locked-Up Next To the World's Largest Cattle Feedlot

          Static-99 Scam: I’ve got the DVD and I’ll re-watch the documentary (“A Home For Paedophiles”). It’s been some years now and I’ll have to ask Mike again about the interplay between him and Theroux when he gets to talk to the outside world again. I know there was some but I don’t remember the details. The BBC would have had to be a party to an extensive contractual agreement with CSH that would cover who they could, and who they could not, talk to. If I recall correctly, they dragged Bill Price out for the benefit of putting on a freak show, as he often is. There are some genuinely creepy guys there that the administration can hand-select for any media spectacle. They like guys who are pretty delusional. Yes, I remember that scene with D’Orazio going ‘thera-spooky’ in accusing the guy of “aggression” when he displayed no such thing. That may have been one of the more inadvertently revealing scenes in the film. Yes, Hendricks was the grenade pin that destroyed any reasonable expectation of getting out of prison on your release date. If my release date had been just a year later than it was I may well have been considered for civil commitment. They were just starting to put it together when I got out. Remember, violence = a) victim under fourteen or b) actual violence (mostly). Now one can’t tell what the term means in any particular case with any precision.

        • The Static-99R Is A Scam

          Thank you again David.

          You say that those who go through Coalinga’s “treatment” have higher recidivism rates than those who get out “through the courts.” If true, that’s very telling as to “Dr.” Deirdre D’Orazio (and the people like her). When D’Orazio et al. treats people without respect, subjecting them to the polygraph, the plethysmograph (shown in the documentary), and without respect to their Constitutional rights — after all of those people have served their prison sentence — then is it real treatment?

          The way D’Orazio described the “patient’s” simple request for privacy between the BBC and himself cannot in anyway be described as “abusive and aggressive.” However, I fear that D’Orazio — and others like her — routinely exaggerate encounters with her patients. It makes me wonder what these “clinicians,” “therapists,” and “psychologists” — not just in the SVP setting, but in other sex offender treatment settings as well — write in their “reports” as a form of personal vendetta, revenge, or retaliation against those they are supposed to be “treating.”

          It would be worse if these reports, showing obvious subjective (and in the above case, obviously exaggerated) interpretation, were to be used against any person in the future. That is what people ought to be guarding against: The assumption that these “experts,” whether they are “doctors” or not,” are 100% honest. The doctors that are employed by the government/state are the ones that are the most threat to constitutional rights and justice, as they have the vested interest to interpret events and evidence through the lens of their employer’s best political interests (as doing so will almost always be awarded later on in their career).

      • David Kennerly, Barely Allowed Out-Of-Doors

        One other thing, as you mentioned “castration,” some years ago one of the “treatment” therapists told men at Vacaville, the forerunner to Coalinga as the s.o. civil commitment warehouse, that if they would get themselves castrated, she would work to get them out. Like Lucy with the football, she completely burned those willing to take that awful step.

        • David Kennerly, I Stopped At Harris' Ranch & Was Locked-Up Next To the World's Largest Cattle Feedlot

          Correction: Atascadero, not Vacaville.

        • kind of living

          David ,,,,, ,, sure enough , that where I was raised in Atascadero , and we raised cattle , lol my dad worked at the hospital , LPN , RN , and was the union leader , years ago , him and his boss the administrator were best friends pushed to get the CO;s off of the wards , as they were ass holes , lol and a threat to People placed there , cancer got my pops , and his boss died years later from a heart attack , as well as a few other friends , my father was all about rights , he truly loved the people he served , and even went as far as seeing to it that anyone that abused the patient’s was fired , he started out a phych tech , the patients he was working with were never going to get out , but when he became too sick to do the job any longer he sold the place and we moved , 2 years later he died , my family came in and pretty much robbed me and my sister , the sent my sister to her crazy mother and left me homeless , I was only 15 , my father signed so I could work , I can no longer afford to live there , I lived in Morro Bay years later and became a fisher man , sorry bout your or deal over that way , it use to be a friendly town , with Zero LE , lol , as there was little crime , the crime came in with the same people that wanted things the way things were out in the mid west where they came from or the vision wishful thinking , lots of cops , and none different than them selfs , gave the bums rush to most of the real working poor folks , trigger lol we was hearing that the hospital was getting worse as my pops was getting mail from some of his patients , as well as the few that stayed on after my father left , sad really it would break my fathers heart to know sick people are being harmed , he had issues with a doctor over at Atascadero , they had may fights , the administer findly was able to get enough on him and fired him , this was a long time ago right ? but that hospital was always bad , the state was the issue when my father was there and bunk practice , even making it hard for the administer , only way to really fight back at the time was through the union ,

        • Tim Moore

          Someday, I would like to gather the life stories of registrants and put them in a book. I enjoyed reading Frank L’s; your’s seems really interesting.

  13. mike r

    Lot of Mikes all a sudden…LOL
    AJ, the final doc that I am going to file is in your email bro..Check her out…..I am filing this next Tue or Wed…I think we frigging nailed it. Anyone want to check out one of the best damn opposition brief you have ever seen? It’s up until Friday…
    Comments welcome…….

  14. David Kennerly, Barely Allowed Out-Of-Doors

    I was invited to dinner at some neighbor’s last week. It was a wonderful meal in a beautifully restored, hilltop Victorian with a wrap-around view of the City. Near the end of the evening, over brandy, the hostess turned to me with excitement and asked if I didn’t think that Oprah would make a wonderful President. I’m afraid that she was very crestfallen at my obviously less-than-enthusiastic facial response to the prospect of an Oprah-for-President movement. The scope of what would be so wrong about such an initiative was impossible for me to reduce to a one-sentence response so I, less than skillfully, offered “Celebrities should never run for President. And I don’t like Oprah at all.” My hostess appeared deeply wounded at my shocking admission that I didn’t like, indeed LOVE, Oprah Winfrey with an enthusiasm generally reserved for the most saintly who walk the Earth. Oprah had scared the bejeezus out of me in the late 1980s because she had the obvious ability to charm even people I thought reasonably intelligent while embracing fairy tales, such as the Satanic Ritual Abuse fantasies, and all of the horrors it visited upon innocent people, as reality. I can’t tell you how many times I winced when someone would say to me “I LIKE Oprah!” The first time was in 1988 when my gay barber said it while Oprah played in the background in his second-floor shop in the Castro. It was then that I knew America was in trouble, that it was not just a problem with Christian conservatives but with the great, gooey expanses on the left, as well. Magical thinking is NOT our friend.

    “Oprah Winfrey Helped Create Our American Fantasyland”

    • But what about the brandy?

      @David K, Connoisseur of Brandy

      The Brandy was not ruined by the hostess’ thought was it in such a fine setting?

    • C

      Thank you for such an honest reply to this individual who, in my view, is the typical, celebrity obsessed American. Their knowledge of the world is filtered through daytime TV, Facebook and Intagram. If we were living in the movie Idiocracy, (perhaps we are), she would have voted for President Camacho.

    • The Static-99R Is A Scam

      I have never understood the popularity of Oprah either. She is a black woman who overcame extreme adversity. She was able to create a massively popular and profitable media empire (Harpo Productions). However, after watching a few of her shows, she has always struck me as an ok — but not great — television host. A lot of the subjects Oprah covered were sugarcoated with what I can only describe as superficiality intended to appeal to the mass audiences. (I will read that Slate article later.)

      However, Oprah also brought us people like Dr. Phil (technically not licensed to practice psychology), Dr. Oz, Suze Orman, and Barack Obama. As I grow older, I start to feel that the very latter is not a very good thing (especially in light of Obama having signed IML and his doublespeak as to criminal justice reform and mass incarceration). However, Obama was certainly a better alternative to Trump IMO. With Trump: He seems to be going after the disenfranchised, as well as the First Amendment. I fear that Trump may even come after us next, as it would certainly fit his pro-law enforcement pandering/narrative.

      • David Kennerly, "Childhood Innocence" As An Almost Supernatural Concept.

        Well, I think that I do understand her popularity and it can be summed up in one word : ABUSED! Very early in her career, she “came out” as having been molested as a child, a claim which three or four of her closest relatives, including a sister, claim she made up entirely for the express purpose of attracting a fanbase. They claim that they had asked her why she would make it up and she told them just that, that it was for her career.

        • The Static-99R Is A Scam

          Well, if Oprah does become president, her pandering to the mass — as well as her past sexual assault allegations — may very well be to our detriment. :-/

        • David Kennerly, My Crystal Ball Is Broken

          Well, I am hesitant to say “Of course she won’t win!” since I once said the same thing about the current depraved creature which now inhabits the White House and Mar A Lago (“Creature From The Dark ‘Lago’). But I will say that I doubt that she would win. I would hope that her many failings as an actual person (and not just an action figure) and deficits as a politician would emerge given the excavations to which her life would be subjected as a candidate. I would also like to think that policies cannot become substantially worse for us given that sex offender policies are starting to make liberal people (in the original sense of the term) choose sides.

        • AJ

          You mean like her reliance on “The Secret” as the key to success, happiness, and world peace? (

        • The Static-99R Is A Scam

          I certainly hope you are correct with both. However, if Oprah does decide to run — and given the choice between the Orange One and Oprah — I think that Oprah will win over Cheeto Mussolini (given that it is difficult to overcome the number of unwanted artifacts found in Orange One’s “excavations” of life thus far). I’m talking about Russian collusion, mafia connections, paying off porn stars, firing the FBI director to cover-up wrongdoing, Emoluments Clause, and various other questionable conduct. If you’ve ever wondered of how Trump was able to suddenly recover after his bankruptcies, check this documentary out:

          Also, the Deutsche Bank/Trump connection:

          Personally, I’d prefer Bernie Sanders to run again. If the Democratic Party didn’t sabotage Sanders for Clinton, then I think Bernie would have won over Trump.

        • Tim Moore

          Me too. I am wondering if Corey Booker will run. He voted against Adam Walsh and recently the FISA reauthorization

      • pedro

        All i have to say about this is…Bill Clinton opened the coffin for us and Obumer nail it shut!!!

  15. Lake County

    There is a new CA law on the books that can help the innocent,

    Man’s name cleared based on new evidence and new California law –
    Penal Code section 1473.7, which allows one who is no longer incarcerated or restrained to pursue a motion to vacate when that person provides “newly discovered evidence of actual innocence … that requires vacation of the conviction or sentence as a matter of law or in the interest of justice.

    • Tax dollars

      Glad there is a law that allows for vacation of conviction or sentence after parole or probation ends.

  16. mike r @AJ

    The response to my complaint…. check it out…. After reading it more they have hit on every issue.

    • New Person

      @Mike R

      They side-stepped involuntary servitude.

      1. This is not african slavery. You are not contesting slavery. You are contesting involuntary servitude – compulsory service.
      There are four factors to involuntary servitude:
      a) Contract
      b) Compensation
      c) Term
      d) Domination

      They denoted all involuntary servitude that is born to all citizens. The registry is born out of conviction. Therein lies a distinct difference. Only punishment can be levied upon conviction. Anything imposing involuntary servitude outside of conviction punishment is prohibited. Remember, your service isn’t just in-person registering. You are to abide by all constraints and restrictions everyday as a registrant. You carry a registration card everyday. If you move residency, in state or out of state, as well as travel abroad, then you are also required to report.

      Simply ask the AG: Is the Registry born to all citizens equally? Or is the Registry only applied to those from conviction of a crime.

      That’s where the AG will falter. Not all convictions are required for the registry. Not all California citizens are required for the registry.

    • New Person

      @Mike R

      The AG only mentioned the history of the registry starting with SORNA. Now, if this is strictly California based, then the registry existed long before SORNA. It was also concluded as punishment under California law history.

      BTW, Mike R, if you had your conviction vacated (set aside, dismissed), then according to SORNA, you should not be a part of the registry. The AG quoted only conviction(s) of sex crimes. I hope you had your conviction vacated b/c this would thwart the AG’s statement verbatim.

    • R M

      @mike r, what can you do next in this legal process? I’m asking because i don’t know. Time barring an issue has been overcome in many cases.

  17. David Kennerly, I Stopped At Harris' Ranch & Was Locked-Up Next To the World's Largest Cattle Feedlot

    We have gone from a “high-trust” to a “low-trust” country in the space of fifty-or-so years. For some reason, Americans have gradually lost all faith in the very quality that made this country so spectacular in the first place. Kind of like how Washington once decided that they had to virtually outlaw communism because they didn’t recognize that communism could never compete for the hearts-and-minds of America. They lost their faith and their trust. I see that Reason’s Nick Gillespie weighs in here on low-versus-high trust:

  18. Chris F (@Mike R)

    I’m a bit behind…

    For the motion to dismiss from the US AG, can’t you respond to most of them that:

    The US AG’s reliance on cases like Smith V Doe and Con DPS V Doe, as well as other cases cited that, after researching, also reference those same SCOTUS cases, no longer benefits from stare decisis because those decisions all clearly relied on false and unsubstantiated evidence from McKune v. Lile, 536 U.S. 24,33 (2002) supplied by the Solicitor General that recidivism rates for sex offenders were “frightening and high” as well as recidivism being “as high as 80 percent”. As the original complaint stated, that evidence was thoroughly debunked by Ira Mark Ellman in his research paper titled “”FRIGHTENING AND HIGH”: THE SUPREME COURT’S CRUCIAL MISTAKE ABOUT SEX CRIME STATISTICS” (2015). Those statements infected hundreds of cases, and perhaps thousands of laws across the country. While the US Constitution should not stand in the way of legislators trying to protect the public from a clear and imminent threat to its people with a number so frightening as “80 percent”, that is a far cry from the average of all valid government and other respected studies that show a recidivism between 1% and 15% and lower than any other crime than murder. Even SCOTUS, in its majority comments in Packingham v. North Carolina (2017) declared “the troubling fact that the law imposes severe restrictions on persons who already have served their sentence and are no longer subject to the supervision of the criminal justice system,” and observed that this fact is “not an issue before the Court.” This cases serves to make it an issue before the court using the real facts and statistics, most of which come from the US government or it’s States own research.

    Something like that for a start. Then you may also hit on the individual points the AG tried to make.

    • Moderator

      @mike r has previously provided his contact info. In order to keep this forum from turning into a personal conversation please contact him directly regarding the specific details of his law suit. Thank you. ***Moderator***

      • Chris F (@Moderator)

        I apologize, but given how the information I am discussing affects most people on here and can benefit from input of others in case I am wrong or missing something, I thought it more appropriate to discuss publicly. This type of rebuttal could be useful in any case where the state or federal government tries to use the above cases against a sex offender’s motion.

        Please discuss with the other powers that be what types of discussion are permissible in the public forum, and which should be held privately and I’ll be glad to abide by that decision.

        Thank you for what you do to keep this place a great resource.

        • Moderator

          No need to apologize. It was discussed. This level of detail and (typical) length of verbiage is more than this forum is intended for. @mike r is welcome to provide updates on his endeavor, but we ask that detailed and lengthy discussions be taken off-line in order to keep this a valuable resource for everyone. These days there is no shortage of other venues to accomplish this. Thanks for understanding. ***Moderator***

    • AJ

      Rational Basis review pretty much blows any argument about “right” and “wrong” numbers out of the water. Punishment needs to be established. There are a couple things I’m looking into about that. If they pan out in any way, I’ll let you folks all know (subject to new rules…).

    • New Person


      That type of extortion also occurs here for those no longer on ML, but still have to register. I think Maietta (sp?) won his case again a private internet business. Applying it to google or any search engine would be great!

      I dunno if it runs parallel to right to privacy. In California, that’s a constitutional law – the right to pursue and obtain privacy. There is one caveat to that, that is unless you’re a registrant. A lifetime term of loss of privacy is given to all registrants.

      I think the California registry is unconstitutional to it’s own constitution b/c of the fact only one term is given out to registrants: a lifetime term. That implies you cannot pursue or obtain privacy. This is an inalienable right under California Constitution, but as a free California Citizen, you are denied this inalienable right. California has no tiers, despite having different levels of risk assessments.

      The loss of an inalienable right is a disability. 1203.4 states it removes all penalties and disabilities coming form the conviction. This happens to all who qualify except those listed within 1203.4. De-registering isn’t a denoted exception to 1203.4 and yet no registrant can de-register any longer.

      I say any longer b/c before the registry was deemed cruel and unusual punishment in a California court. You could stop registering with a 1203.4, but that information remained, informing you are a registrant. A case was won to vacate that information once you earned the 1203.4. Thus no longer having to register and not be on any registry.

    • Lake County

      Very interesting case. Maybe if plaintiffs win, we can get the U.S. to enact the same law.

  19. mike r

    Please moderator, let us have some leeway on at least short little snippets like these in order to get feedback from others on here. This site and the people on here have been a tremendous resource and this will effect each and every one of the people on this site and on the registry…I totally understand that only short arguments and facts of law should be presented on your forum but a whole lot of people on here are very interested and deeply connected to what I am doing. THANK YOU……

    • Tim Moore

      I was wondering Mike, if the AG wanted to know your game plan, all he or his staff would have to do is go on this site and read. As much as it is engaging to discuss and refine the larger concepts here, maybe this is a good thing, to do all of the detailed strategizing in private?

      • United States of Oppression

        Who knows they could have been here already and saw what you have been up too. They definitely have the money and resources to go over a site like this. Kind of hard to win a card game when they know what’s in your hand.

        • Tim Moore

          Good point. That may have happened. For whatever reason, I have found this a unproductive place to do organizing.

      • Steve

        Tim, it’s been mentioned many times that it might not be smart to discuss it on this public forum but Mike has said he doesn’t care.

        • Tim Moore

          My mistake for repeting. I can’t follow every thread faithfully.

  20. Chris F

    I agree with you Mike R, and at the moderators request we are continuing this discussion privately by email and will try to keep public updates or questions short or linked offsite.

  21. NPS

    Just an FYI:
    Last month someone asked about the TSA pre-check enrollment and if any RC has been approved. I went ahead and applied for it today and was approved. I only needed to show my ID and birth certificate, and they took my live scan fingerprint. I don’t think the RC status pops up because the lady showed no change in expression and was very friendly.

    My record was expunged 4.5 years ago and I’ve never been on the website, but I don’t think that matters.They just want to make sure you’re a U.S. citizen and don’t have either a permanent or interim disqualifying conviction in the last 5 years. You can find that info here:

  22. David Kennerly, "Childhood Innocence" As An Almost Supernatural Concept.

    “What innocence she had, we’ve now had to have a conversation that kinda takes that away and she’s ten.” Someday, this era will be looked back upon as the age in which people said and believed absurd and ridiculous things. ____________ “Police Receive Hundreds of Complaints About Pictures on Sex Offender’s Flickr Account” Of course, none of them are “porn” (so far, but methinks that there are some bills looming on the horizon that could magically transform them) and the issue is the fact that some Registrants, operating entirely within the law, have photographed random kids in public settings and then posted them on the web. The idea behind the inevitable legislation will be that the status of the person exercising their rights will determine IF they possess those rights.–470007583.html Also, there’s this: “Police: Reports of sex offender taking photos under review, but no laws broken
    Augusta police said Wednesday that they’re investigating complaints from outraged parents but have found no crimes to have occurred.”

    • AJ

      Sounds like a smart-a$$ RC who is messing with the Chicken Littles. “Let’s see, I’ll go take perfectly legal pictures that get their dander up, then sit back and chuckle.” One after my own heart!

    • C

      Can’t say I blame the parents for being creeped out here, but on the other hand they should feel flattered someone found them interesting enough to be photographed.

      Are these just point-and-shoot snapshots or is the guy a decent photog? Are the captures scoring well among Flickr members?

      Kudos to the po po for not releasing the RC’s name.

  23. mike r @AJ

    Yeah you know what? I am just going to respond to USAG and keep them in the fight. This makes for a tougher fight, but I’ll just press ahead. I think I can overcome everything they threw out there.

  24. AJ

    Just when you thought we’d heard about all the abuses and tricks at NSA: Forget About Siri and Alexa — When It Comes to Voice Identification, the “NSA Reigns Supreme” ( God Bless Edward Snowden! (Now it’s clear how they were able to ID “Jihadi John” of ISIS fame.)

    In other news, for those who think fingerprint biometrics to be a safet way to keep things protected, I refer you to a MN SC decision this past week: State v Diamond ( In it, MN SC ruled that forced taking of one’s fingerprint to unlock an encrypted cellphone is not self-incrimination. I can see the logic (it’s just another type of “key” in your possession), but it’s still worrisome.

    • Iris, not the flower


      Just splash biometrics across that because iris or retinal scans will be next to the mobile device, etc for security and it will rapidly fall underneath this court ruling. Then it will be implanted chips that sync with the mobile device, etc like they can do already and they, too, will fall underneath the MN court ruling. MN really opens a pandora box w/that ruling and how fast it will spread like a bad Trojan horse virus.

      • AJ

        Oh I know. What’s scary is that it holds some legal “logic” (as much as that word applies in the legal realm). Unless someone can invent an easy way to read a brainwave signature (such as your brain waves when you think of your kitten, “Patches”) as a biometric, I don’t see how to avoid what MNSC has decided.

    • mike r

      That’s their MO. Start with something like the finger prints and end up with absolutely no 4th amendment rights to your info on your phone then next it will be unlocking your door, turning the knob and walking through your house isn’t a search.

      • AJ

        Just to be clear, MN SC ruled on the 5th Amdt issue of self-incrimination, *not* a 4th Amdt. issue. They already had a warrant to search the phone, they just didn’t have the “key” (fingerprint) to decrypt it. So in the house analogy, they would already have the warrant to search the house, but wouldn’t have the key to open the one and only way into the house.

  25. Sam

    If only laws were based off of science a lot of use would have been charged as minors

  26. AJ

    Florida v. Jardine ( is a case that adds some points for consideration to the compliance check discussion on here. Can a LEO enter your curtilage without your permission? It depends on how and why they do it. From reading this case, it would appear that an officer (and perhaps a partner for backup) is allowed to enter, knock and, if no answer, leave. That would seem to indicate that the loud pounding on the door and announcements would be beyond what SCOTUS says is an exception. Likewise if there’s a whole SWAT team along for the fun and ride, or a discotheque of lighting on the donut-mobiles.

    One thing I learned from reading this: do NOT have a door knocker!

  27. mike r

    Have any of you heard of the Woodsman? Here is a trailer but I am finding it hard to find a complete version. Anyone have a link throw it out there….

  28. AJ

    Here’s the latest on the McGuire lawsuit against AL:

    The attorney (also named McGuire, relation unknown) does a good job of shredding the typical lines we hear from the other side. He also does a nice write up of the Mendoza-Martinez factors.

    Reading the document under “d.” (page 28), the attorney’s contempt for the State shines through. It’s a good read, for sure.

    If PACER has the various attachments and appendices mentioned, I’ll provide links to them in a thread to this post.

    • AJ

      More from the McGuire suit is available at until January 27.

      There are two files there, Appellee’s (State’s) Supplemental Brief, and “Once a RC, not always a RC” (paraphrased title) by Dr. Hanson. The Brief weighs in at 118 pages, but about 80 of those pages are the AL Statute(s). The Hanson doc comes in around 60 pages, but maybe 20 are references. (If anyone is concerned, both documents were gleaned from PACER, so it is truthful information that is already publicly available. And we all know what SCOTUS thinks about that!)

      There are some VERY good quotes in that Hanson paper, including, “[L]ife-time restrictions seem to be designed for a category of individuals that do not exist.” The charts and tables are missing from the document itself, but can be found at the end of the file. Of particular interest are Figures 2 & 3 (pp. 57-58). They give clear, graphical indication of the risk level from studying thousands of RCs over 25 years. Given how CA loves S-99R, you’d think they’d listen to the creator of it…. Naw, that would mean admitting it’s punishment and/or overkill.

    • mike r

      Man that is one of the best argued case I have read. Finally some talent coming into the game. Lots of ammunition right there AJ……And I haven’t even read the entire thing yet..

  29. CR

    I got a jury summons. I do not want to serve on a jury. Given my own past criminal record, I doubt any sane prosecutor would fail to strike me if I were selected, but I don’t even want to get to that point. I don’t want to have to answer their questions voir dire, especially in front of the rest of the jury pool. I am sure they will ask things that would be painful for me to answer publicly.

    I don’t know what to do. I do not believe in our system of justice. How can I participate in something I don’t believe in? In the balance, I don’t think it renders justice. Maybe in the abstract, on paper, and in lofty academic review, but not in real life. In real life, the system is corrupt, unbalanced, with all the power on the side of the prosecutor, and with the defense left with nothing more than technical points of opposition.

    Yes, there are people who do bad things (as I once did) who have violated the law, and upon whom punishment is due under that law. That is true of laws I agree with, and of those that I don’t. As a jurist, that distinction is irrelevant. It doesn’t matter what I think about the justness of the law. And that really disturbs me.

    Then there are others who are falsely accused who could end up being punished for an alleged crime that they did not actually commit. Or who could be accused of a crime more serious than what they actually did. Who am I to decide another person’s guilt? Who am I to condemn someone to hell? I could not bear the thought of being wrong.

    What can I do?

    • mike r

      You can’t serve man.. If you have a record, at least a felony, you can’t serve….Send it back telling them you will acquit anyone and are totally bias against the cops and judicial system….That’s what I do…Never hear another peep from em…

      • CR

        I don’t have a felony conviction. Two charges, deferred adjudication + 10 years probation. I completed my probation in 2002.

        I’m in Texas. I’m eligible to vote, and eligible for jury duty.

        • lovewillprevail

          Also here in TX and in same situation as you. Just show up. Chances of even being asked to serve are slim form my own personal experiences. And if asked, then respond as Mike R says above.

      • David Kennerly, My Crystal Ball Is Broken

        If I WERE able to serve on a jury I would do so, gladly. Jury duty is one of the few government demands on our persons that we should relish as an opportunity for advancing justice and enthusiastically discharge. For myself, I can think of nothing more civically important than actively participating in the justice system as a juror. Jury nullification is the concept that, regardless if someone is guilty or innocent, some laws are simply unjust and the only responsible position to take as a juror is to find the defendant not guilty. We can also, of course, insist that the prosecution has met their burden of proof. We are within our rights to exercise jury nullification even though you won’t find a court anywhere that will recognize that right. Nevertheless, I will never be chosen for a jury and so am irritated when they invariably send me a summons in the mail.

    • David Kennerly, My Crystal Ball Is Broken

      Does your jury summons not have directions to either delay or demonstrate ineligibility? Mine always have and I have never had to show up for jury duty. I ignored a bunch of them, too until they would threaten me at which point I would tell them that I would love to serve on a jury and, as a convicted felon, nullify any guilty judgments. That always shut ’em up.

      • CR

        Yes, it does. But I’m not ineligible. I have an “ORDER OF PROBATION WITHOUT ADJUDICATION OF GUILT”. So in Texas, that does not count as a felony conviction for any purpose other than for sex offender registration (in which case it is considered to be a conviction.)

        What do you mean about nullifying any guilty judgments?

        • lovewillprevail

          In your situation in TX, you are not considered to have a felony conviction so you will be required to serve. So don’t worry, just show up. Again, chances of actually being picked are slim, and again, just tell them what Mike R suggested above. You will quickly be sent home.

        • Katharine

          Like lovewillprevail, I strongly recommend showing up for jury duty. You really don’t need the law on your back for failing to show up. If you are called to be in a criminal case jury pool, the judge will ask if people have reasons they cannot be fair to both parties in the case. That’s when you can stand up and say your piece, at which point the judge will likely let you go. And even if s/he doesn’t, the prosecutor will not want you on the jury. Also, the courts deal in civil cases, in which no prosecutor is involved, so your anti-LE bias will have no bearing.

    • Sam

      I almost got a charge for not showing up for jury duty in NY. Seriously didn’t know I could get a charge for not showing up for jury duty when I was ineligible. I had to go to the courts to prove I was ineligible. They asked me for my proof. I had to pull up the SOR and then the lady was like “mmmmhmmmmm. You see its not our job to find out if you got a crime you gotta prove you was guilty of something before we can say you don’t need to be on jury duty”.

    • AJ

      If it’s like the two states where I’ve been called, it may end up being a boring day sitting in a room with a pool of other jurors. You may well never even see an attorney or a judge. But assuming you get out of the holding pen, I recall there being a written questionnaire to help winnow the field. You could detail your stuff there…and probably get bounced. If you do land in court, it’s a bit more of a roll of the dice. Were it me, I’d grab something good to read, maybe a small snack, and expect to sit around before going home.

      Some people suggest just ignoring the summons, because there’s no proof you got it. Unfortunately, first-class mail is considered delivered unless it comes back. So following that path may end up with a bench warrant for failure to respond to summons.

      I do agree with David, but I completely understand your reticence.

  30. Counting the days

    Off probation and will soon be filing for felony reduction. P.O. says he can’t support it in court
    ( god forbid law enforcement do the right thing!), but he said he would not contest it.
    My question is, how hard to file this Pro Se. Therapist said let public defender handle it, but I don’t trust them (or any lawyer any more ). San Jose city will file , but that exposes my charges to people, and I want to take some classes there next fall.
    Anyone else do this on their own ?

    • David

      @Counting, I strongly recommend that you do not do this Pro Se. Instead, contact ACSOL and see if they can get you in touch with a qualified, experienced lawyer to help you with this. You may only get one shot at this, so don’t screw it up!

  31. David Kennerly, My Crystal Ball Is Broken

    “Sex Offender Treatment: A Waste of Time and Effort?” This is from the U.K. where they have abandoned the SOTP (Sex Offender Treatment Programme) as a treatment regime and replaced it with other programs which have not yet been thoroughly discredited. And yes, they have found that reoffense rates were slightly higher than in those who did not receive any treatment at all.

    Also, there is this from today, also from the U.K. “Worboys: Forensic psychologist ‘horrified’ by lack of evidence behind prison sex offender courses”

  32. David Kennerly, Me Think Thou Doth Protest Too Much

    “‘Paedophile hunter’ Chris Smith ordered to sign sex offenders register” ___ No, darn it! Not THAT Chris Smith. That would have been brilliant. No, this is a ‘Chris Smith’ in the U.K. He very cleverly set up an entrapment website to ensnare ‘paedophiles’ but somehow managed to entrap himself, instead. “Honest Guv! It was one of those sick paedos that sent it to me! I had no idea it was there!” I don’t know why people are not more suspicious of the vigilantes. They’re SO obvious. You’d think that decades of evidence about gay-bashers being, well, queer themselves would have made people a bit more suspicious of our modern-day hysterical busybodies.

  33. Bill

    Anyone Hear anything new about the Michigan case Snyder v Doe, trying to find out when some of us get dropped off the list, this is getting old! Best of luck to all! Also anyone know when the decesion on People V Temelkoski will be? Thank you.

  34. David Kennerly, Me Think Thou Doth Protest Too Much

    “WARNING: New Scam Targets Sex Offenders”

    • See SPOT...

      See SPOT run, see SPOT jump, see SPOT look like an a$$ when someone uses their title to run a scam and decide to do nothing about it until they are caught by someone and is exposed for the vileness they are.

  35. David Kennerly, Me Think Thou Doth Protest Too Much

    “Coalinga State Hospital Riot” on local Fresno talk radio show. They are complete idiots but I am told it is worth listening to for the entertainment value. The first several minutes in I can tell that it’s going to be a real self-righteous hate-fest. Look for the show titled: “Broeske & Musson 1.17.18 Coalinga State Hospital Riot, ….” Also, “Janice Bellucci,you’re a horrible person & should be locked up! Shut your pie-hole!”

  36. ReadyToFight

    Question- At what point do we say enough is enough and really start to fire back?

    Also, you’d think it’d be really easy in today’s society. But what path would need to be taken to bring Adam Walsh into our club?

  37. someone who cares

    I wanted to see if anyone here knows what type of background companies employers typically use. My guy received an expungement and was told that his record should be removed from most background sites within 30 days or they face a penalty. Here inCalifornia, I believe that background checks only go back about 7 years. Before applying for a job, though, that might conduct a background check, I would like to do one ourselves to see what still shows up, but I don’t want to use just any bogus company but one that an employer might use. Any suggestions?

    • ReadyToFight

      They tell us here in Cali that things will be okay. And after 7 years you’ll pass a background test and be able to find work.
      What they never mention is that many employers that do background tests will also have the company doing the test search the SOR and once they get a ping you’ll lose the job if you’ve already started training, you’ll be humiliated in front of your peers, and then in a few weeks you’ll get a letter explaining why you were termed and offered a chance to disput it if the information is not correct. But (shrug) non of this is punishment.

      • New Person

        Not punishment, but you are compliant with all constraints of being on the registry everyday – meaning you’re serving the registry everyday by being on the website, abiding by “extra rules” that do not pertain to free CA citizens such as/was presence and living restrictions, being subject to compliant checks, be at the ready for a line-up call if there is a child incidences around your living areas, and travel hindrances everyday.

        How is this not compelled service to the state? If it’s not punishment, then any compelled (compulsory) service is prohibited. People think it’s simply in-person reporting, but it isn’t. You have a registration card. You must carry it with you all the time. Being a registrant is a 24/7 thing for a lifetime in CA and only aimed at registrants, not any other convicts nor free CA citizens.

  38. TS

    A victory in Michigan – Temelkoski

    There has been chatter here on this case, so here is the victory notice.

    • TS

      BTW, read the MSC’s opinion in Temelkoski and the dissent especially about due process challenges. Very helpful info about them and things to be wary of going forward.

      Maybe @AJ & @Chris F could share their thoughts on it and break it down into layman language for the masses.

      If this is something @mike r should note in his efforts, here it is.

      • Chris F

        Very interesting dissenting opinion! That judge, and others that take quotes of old decisions incorrectly out of context, don’t deserve to be on the bench.

        It demonstrates how anyone can take a just and fair court opinion like the majority had, and find something from past court cases that can be taken out of context to justify doing something unconstitutional.

        This judge claims that retroactive additions like S.O. registration is ok even if against what was agreed to at the time because :

        “[L]egislation readjusting rights and burdens is not unlawful solely because it
        upsets otherwise settled expectations. This is true even though the effect of the
        legislation is to impose a new duty or liability based on past acts.” Concrete Pipe & Prod
        of California, Inc v Constr Laborers Pension Trust for Southern California, 508 US 602,
        637 (1993)
        But if you follow the trail of decisions back from that, this case relies on Lichter v. United States,
        334 U.S. 742 (1948).

        That case was about the government creating an act that allows it to go back and take what it deems “excessive profits” from companies that benefited greatly by WWII government contracts. The reasoning states: “set forth the general background of the Renegotiation Act and the basis for claiming that the renegotiation of war contracts was necessary in order to sustain this nation’s share of the burden of winning World War II”

        So, in other words, this judge is saying that it’s now OK for the government to change any agreements, both commercially for profit companies, and within the criminal process (though the referenced cases weren’t about criminal cases at all if you go back in history) just because it was during a national crisis the government was allowed to do it to protect that nation?

        How does that compare? An individual groping someone and making an agreement with the government, is now equal to a situation like WWII and the potential loss of our entire nation?


        Respectfully BITE ME mister judge. You are just trying to find unrelated excuses to toss out not only the US Constitution when it inconveniences you, but basic principals of fairness in order to cause suffering to those you feel are beneath you.

  39. mike r

    Man BS if Megan’s Law “Internet” website doesn’t apply retro to me.
    The USAG insinuating the LE only and a website that you could only access by going to the police station equates to a publicly accessible website at a touch of a mouse is false. Not only that, “Effective September 24, 2004, Penal Code section 290.46 required the Department of Justice to create this Web site on or before July 1, 2005.” Which authorized the publicly accessible website is unambiguous that it was to take effect September 2004. Retroactively applied to my April 2004 offense date.


      I was convicted in 98. Is Megan’s law retroactively applied to me? I had a brain tumor so I do not remember a lot.

  40. David Kennerly, Me Think Thou Doth Protest Too Much

    Coalinga State Hospital and the City of Coalinga, Janice Bellucci is coming to take your lunch!__
    “Child porn ‘epidemic’ triggers Coalinga hospital lockdown, patients file lawsuit” This includes a copy of the lawsuit.___ _

    And this appears to be the same story:___

  41. Illinois Contact

    After more than a year since NARSOL was joined by NCRSOL and two John Doe plaintiffs in a civil rights challenge to North Carolina’s SORNA scheme, there will be hearing before Judge Loretta Biggs, on Tuesday, February 6, 2018 in United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina in Winston-Salem. This preliminary hearing will consist of the state’s attorneys attempt to convince Judge Biggs to grant its Motion to Dismiss. The original complaint was filed over a year ago in January, 2017. Here is a link to the text by lawyer Paul Dubbeling. Read through the entire 88 pages, and I think you will agree that it’s brilliant, comprehensive, and compelling. It’s exactly the “strike at the roots” to bring down the entire registry approach so many have been advocating.

    • cool CA RC

      Only 2 people filed? Could this be a class action lawsuit?

      • TS

        No, cannot be class action because it would not work. It has been discussed here previously but it needs to be done as applied to each person(s), not as a class of people. Different tactics needed for class action and as applied to each person(s) where class actions most likely get dismissed because it does not show individual harm(s) to the person(s), which is needed. Death by a thousand cuts (each person) is required instead of a broad brush stroke (which is nice thinking but won’t work as seen). Hopefully, NCRSOL wins this just the way it’s written on behalf of these two North Carolinians.

  42. mike r

    It isn’t Megan’s Law since it goes way back to 1994 I think. It’s about the “Internet” website that was created after the legislature passed the law requiring DOJ create a “Internet” website in 2004. CA had a Megan’s Law website but it was only accessible through police stations and they were even using kiosk at fairs and events where people could then access the site. It was not available on the Internet before the enactment===Effective September 24, 2004, Penal Code section 290.46 required the Department of Justice to create this Web site on or before July 1, 2005 ( My offense date was in April 2004.

  43. mike r

    Good for them…..The case sure seems familiar.

  44. mike r

    Hey, they need to be thanking me or show me some kind of gratitude since they are using my Complaint verbatim in the beginning….That’s funny they used my Pro Se Complaint as a template..Love it…

  45. mike r

    Verbatim…Wow the largest organization in the country using my Pro Se as a template…That really gives a boost of confidence. Love it…AJ, Chris and New person you should all be proud..Compare…Of course I provided an enormous amount of evidence in my Complaint….This is what I told others to do; file your own using mine as a template….

    The registry, originally designed to collect and provide basic information on registrants only to law enforcement, has grown into an elaborate system of affirmative restraints with very little, if any, debate, and without any history of legislative fact-finding or other indication that these restraints are either necessary or effective in protecting the public.
    8. In fact, there is consensus among researchers that these laws not only fail to protect the public, but exacerbate genuine risk factors for recidivism thereby increasing the chance of future criminal activity. See, California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. “Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the lives of registrants and those – such as families – whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety.” (p. 12). “Research has even suggested that offenders may actually be made worse by the imposition of higher levels of treatment and supervision than is warranted given their risk level (Lovins, Lowenkamp & Latessa 2009)”, JILL S. LEVENSON, SEX OFFENDER RESIDENCE RESTRICTIONS: A REPORT TO THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE 2, Oct. 2005, “There is emerging research suggesting that sex offender policies lead to serious unintended collateral consequences for offenders, such as limiting their opportunities for employment, housing, education, and prosocial support systems. As a result, current social policies may contribute to dynamic risk factors for offenders in the community, ultimately becoming counter-productive.”,
    9. Also many states conduct risk assessments prior to being released from custody on all persons convicted of offenses requiring registration under the registry law. See: California Sections 6601 and 6601.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code; Florida, Title XLVII, Chapter 947; Minnesota, Chapter 244, Section 244.052; Arkansas Code Title 12, Subtitle 2, Chapter 12, Subchapter 9, Section 12-12-917; Oregon , OSR Chapter 163A, Division 85; Arizona, A.R.S. 13-3825; Connecticut CGS Section 54-250 to 54-261; Iowa, IAC Chapter 38, p. 1 201-38.3(692A); Colorado, C.R.S. 16-22-102-C.R.S. 16-22-115; Georgia, O.C.G.A. Section 42-1-14; Washington, RCW 9A. 44.130-140.
    10. However, regardless of this individualized determination, all registrants are subject (often for life as is in my case) to close supervision, frequent and onerous in-person reporting requirements, severe restrictions or bans on where they may live, work, or recreate, and random inspections and recall by law enforcement.

  46. David Kennerly, Me Think Thou Doth Protest Too Much

    Seaton: Judge Rosemarie’s Baby Advocacy __

  47. David Kennerly, Me Think Thou Doth Protest Too Much

    “Why Are So Many Sex Offenders Getting Murdered in California’s Prisons?
    One inmate says that prison gangs and even guards team up to assault and sometimes kill sex offenders.” This story is a couple of years old but just as relevant today. __

    __ Here’s another story from the same time period (2015) “Sex offenders are being killed off in California prisons” __

  48. kind of living

    Yet they still think we need to be punished more after we have did our time and paper , still targeted , some of us only able to find housing in gang infested areas ,

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 *