General Comments March 2018

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

Related posts

404 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I believe New Person that the CASOMB is the New Jersey version of the reports. I know of no other reports gov. from CA.

I do not remember who stated to find a case in which the AG was successfully sued confirming subject matter jurisdiction, well here it is.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
65(d)(2) provides that an injunction will bind the parties, as well as “the parties’ officers,
agents, servants, employees, and attorneys,” and “[o]ther persons who are in active concert or
participation with” these individuals. Even if the Attorney General does not have absolute
control and direction over local law enforcement, it cannot be disputed that, as to the
collection of sex offender registration data, local law enforcement at least acts “in active
concert or participation with” the Attorney General, if not as her agent. See, e.g., Cal. Penal
Code § 290.015(b) (requiring local law enforcement agencies to forward registrants’
information to the Department of Justice16 within three days of registration); Schweig Decl.
¶ 3 (describing the collection of sex offender registration data as a “collaborative effort”
involving, among others, the California Department of Justice and local law enforcement
agencies).
However, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d)(2) also provides that an injunction
only binds persons “who receive actual notice of it by personal service or otherwise.” To
ensure that all local law enforcement officials who are responsible for collecting registered
sex offenders’ information are bound by this order, the Court will order the Attorney General
to provide actual notice to all such officials. This requirement does not preclude the parties
from further meeting and conferring to attempt to reach agreement that local law
enforcement will not enforce the enjoined provisions as long as the Court’s order granting
preliminary injunctive relief remains in effect.

Stephen Reinhardt, ‘liberal lion’ of the 9th Circuit, dies at 87

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-reinhardt-obit-20180329-story.html

“11 Call For Action investigates: Registered sex offender living on public dime”

A total freak-out that a Registrant lives in a HUD building in Colorado (Focus On The Family) Springs. Time to send in “I-Witless News!” “It’s super-scary!”They never do explain what they mean by living on the “public’s dime,” though. Oh wait, it’s because it is a federally subsidized building. So other people CAN live on the public’s dime, just not “sex offenders.” Thank God for vigilantism disguised as journalism. http://www.kktv.com/content/news/11-Call-For-Action-investigates-Registered-sex-offender-living-on-public-dime-478289563.html

Here we go New Person. I thought that I concluded it in my brief but apparently I just stated it and didn’t cite it.
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsorp94.pdf

The AG cited this report and cut it off right at the point when it stated re-offense rates were 5%.

Hey New Person, here we go, go get em man. File in state court first since you have more contract rights under state constitution I believe. I think this is the most recent ruling on that issue. I am not sure where you go from there because I have not researched the issue but it appears that it was not settled and the case was remanded back to the CA supreme court for reconsideration or whatever. Dig into more and I will see what I can find giving my time schedules.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1562124.html

Also do a search for Sac pleading paper and you will get boilerplate docs that you just add your info in. It is surprisingly easy and very affordable considering it has only cost me a few hundred bucks so far and if I hired an attorney I would of spent tens of thousands already for crappier briefs.
Also check out the internet identifier case prop 35 that was shot down by the court because there may be some tidbits in there. The following from that case is priceless and i wish i would of paid more attention because I could of just used the following to determine subject matter jurisdiction without going any further but I just solidified my case with what I provided. The following is cool though.

“Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
65(d)(2) provides that an injunction will bind the parties, as well as “the parties’ officers,
agents, servants, employees, and attorneys,” and “[o]ther persons who are in active concert or
participation with” these individuals. Even if the Attorney General does not have absolute
control and direction over local law enforcement, it cannot be disputed that, as to the
collection of sex offender registration data, local law enforcement at least acts “in active
concert or participation with” the Attorney General, if not as her agent. See, e.g., Cal. Penal
Code § 290.015(b) (requiring local law enforcement agencies to forward registrants’
information to the Department of Justice within three days of registration) (“The Attorney General is head of the Department of Justice.” Cal. Gov’t Code § 12510); Schweig Decl.
¶ 3 (describing the collection of sex offender registration data as a “collaborative effort”
involving, among others, the California Department of Justice and local law enforcement
agencies).
However, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d)(2) also provides that an injunction
only binds persons “who receive actual notice of it by personal service or otherwise.” To
ensure that all local law enforcement officials who are responsible for collecting registered
sex offenders’ information are bound by this order, the Court will order the Attorney General
to provide actual notice to all such officials. This requirement does not preclude the parties
from further meeting and conferring to attempt to reach agreement that local law
enforcement will not enforce the enjoined provisions as long as the Court’s order granting
preliminary injunctive relief remains in effect.”

Love the language and reasoning in that case.That was the language from that case.

Look at this prep for my political science class. What a coincidence that I am taking this class now right after i already to the sociology class where everything in it was stating we all have a duty to fight for our rights. It is just really ironic if not downright spooky. LMAO.

Know ALL the Bill of Rights and be able to apply your knowledge of those rights (focus on numbers 1, 4, 5, 6, and 8).
SCLC
NAACP
Civil rights
Civil liberties
Roe v. Wade (1973)
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Founders of the women’s rights movement in the U.S.
Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its various provisions
Selective incorporation
19th Amendment
Gideon v. Wainright (1963)
Black Codes
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
Miller v. California (1973) (know the court’s full definition of obscenity in this landmark case)
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954)
Devices used in southern states to prevent blacks from voting
New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)

As far as going up against the gov. Yeah it feels great and it was a really good feeling taking the fight to them for a change and making them answer and be the defendant. Loved it, even if I somehow (never happen) lose I can say I gave it my best and didn’t wait for someone to act for me. I put myself in this position and I don’t have the money nor the trust to let someone else fight this fight. I would never put my life in the hands of an attorney ever again. Never……….They got me once at my mock trail but they will never get me again without my best effort…..

A Long Island judge arrested for stealing panties form his neighbor. The quotes in the article are kind funny in how shocked everyone is because he’s “respected, well liked, and an upstanding person”. People still think most RC’s have physical horns or something, and not the average Joe you couldn’t pick out of a lineup, and often otherwise upstanding citizens.

https://nypost.com/2018/03/30/dirty-panty-judge-raided-victims-hamper-before-prosecutors/

In light of “frightening and high,” this seems apropos:

“Truth has to be repeated constantly, because Error also is being preached all the time, and not just by a few, but by the multitude. In the Press and Encyclopaedias, in Schools and Universities, everywhere Error holds sway, feeling happy and comfortable in the knowledge of having Majority on its side.”
—Johan Wolfgang von Goethe

The implied right to privacy is pretty interesting since it is in many of the amendments.

1 4 5 6