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

National

IN: Sex offender registry levels stiff penalties

The Indiana Sex and Violent Offender Registry is designed to protect the citizens of the state of Indiana — but some convicted offenders may become victim to stringent, statutory requirements. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. Dustin

    Nice to see a judge recognizing what a waste the registry really is, if only in part. The only thing I would add is that there are other means to “track” serious and high risk offenders, making the registry completely unnecessary for LE purposes.

  2. David

    “I’m elected because the public wants me to use my intelligence and discretion in judging cases.” Remarkable!! A judge who actually does what he is elected to do! And, furthermore, one who recognizes the unfairness and the onerous burdens created by such absurd registry requirements as those of the State of Indiana.

  3. TS

    This is just laziness (and a trap for FTR charges) on the IN Sheriff’s since the system can be set to track RCs as they move within IN when registering at the new county office where then the system notifies the old county office of the move within the state. Any basic computer programmer can set the system to do that to save time and money.

  4. New Person

    From the article:
    =====
    The Indiana Sex and Violent Offender Registry includes numerous rules for offenders to follow.

    [IN Court Judge Robert] Kirsch says it is “too onerous.”

    He said the scope of who is included on the list has grown. “I question whether all these particular offenders need to be on the registry,” Kirsch said.

    The black-and-white requirements of the registry tie the hands of the courts, Kirsch said. When it comes to a person pleading guilty to a crime to conclude a case, “oftentimes the biggest problem is the sex offender registry.”

    However, he said he does not feel like every person labeled a sex offender is the same type of person. There are those that should be closely monitored, he said. There are others that do not meet the criteria of predators, said Kirsch.

    “They are not necessarily evil people,” he said. “The registry paints with a very broad brush.”
    =====

    Judge Kirsch’s response runs contrary to the 2003 Smith v Doe rule with respected to the fifth factor of the seven MM factors:
    =====
    Fifth, the regulatory scheme is not excessive with respect to the Act’s purpose. The State’s determination to legislate with respect to convicted sex offenders as a class, rather than require individual determination of their dangerousness, does not render the Act punitive.
    =====

    This is why we’re all treated as monsters b/c the SCOTUS tells the public so.

  5. totally against public registry

    Hallelujah! finally a sensible judge, Kirsch, who sees the wrongdoings of these law makers and a professor, Janus, who sees what these laws have done to our society and the citizens on the registry. Thank God that there are still people who see the wrong and want to try to set things straighter. Thank you Judge Kirsch. Thank you professor Eric Janus………..

  6. Timothy DA Lawver

    13th Amendment
    Neither slavery nor indentured servitude, except as punishment for crime
    whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,
    shall exist in the United States or any place under their jurisdiction.

    We all know that in 2003, Mr. Roberts himself convinced SCOTUS that
    Megans Law as adopted by the state of Alaska was merely a regulatory regime and not punishment, with the statement, ” registration itself imposes no affirmative disability or constraints “.

    No advocate raised the issue of indenture before that court, it was ignored completely. To be sure registrants are indentured servants. The servitude itself is to maintain state property known as state’s SOR an electronic machine.

    Therefore the act’s extensive and onerous requirements may not be accurately described as simple registration, like registration of ones auto, or registration for the draft. Like the judge stated, ” it is a trap” A trap intended to protect the public from sex deviants in the same manner states have normally and traditionally utilized… Incarceration! Hey look, it works!

    The concept of slavery is alive and well in the United States and is most certainly not ABOLISHED. Mr. Roberts, Congress and SCOTUS(03) have indeed turned back the constitutional liberty clock back 150 years to the time when Men could be considered property. See Ableman v Booth (1859) & also Fugitive slave laws 1793 to1850

    When America fails it will be reasonably related to the quality of our leadership.

  7. CR

    Here is a telling statement by the writer of the article that shows that the author views registration as punishment:

    ==================
    Registrants report for a period of 10 years or life, with the parameters set by state statute. This extended and, in some cases, lifelong punishment for sex offenders may fit the crime in some cases, but do all defendants deserve the same sentence?
    ==================

    “… lifelong punishment …”

    The public, even media sources who should be better informed, commonly refer to sex offender registration as punishment or as a sentence.

    Registrants agree it is punishment. Only most legislators and most judges consider it otherwise.

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 *