ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (3/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings


IA: 2 Convicted of Sex Crimes Can’t Be Held Indefinitely

The Iowa Supreme Court has dismissed the state’s efforts to confine two men convicted for sex abuse crimes indefinitely under the state’s law allowing civil commitment of sexually violent predators. Full Article

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A split 4-3 decision in both of the cases mentioned in the article.

“Preventive detention is very limited in American law because it is seen as antithetical to fundamental liberty interests and the presumption of innocence,”

… sexually violent predator statutes “threaten to deprive individuals of what from time immemorial has been the weightiest of interests — the interest in individual liberty.”

… the vague and flexible standards of the statutes allows, if not encourages, “a better-safe-than-sorry approach” of locking up sex crime violators indefinitely.

Yep, courts are speaking up. Although this case doesn’t mean much overall it is a perk at what is coming. The Millard case, and mine as well are bringing the real issies for the first time If I can manage not to let some tech errors or manipulations screw me up. I hope they take note of judicial notice, I think it is crucial and I have a frigging list of gov docs a mile long I believe they have to take judicial notice and everything else is hearsay BS. If the court takes juducial notice of both the recidivism… Read more »

Sounds like a loop hole that will bring more laws to protect the children.

They’re going to do whatever the hell the want to us regardless. It’s an easy “win” for them come reelection time.

Wow. One of these guys was convicted of assault with intent to commit a sex crime and sentenced to two years in prison. While he was out of prison living in a “Residential Facility” – a halfway house? – to complete a special 10 year term – the State tried to have him committed indefinitely. For an offense worth a 2 year prison sentence! If that does not strike fear into the heart of any good citizen, I do not know what will.

I fear that most people who read that article will fail to question whether the state’s intent was reasonable, or grasp the implications of it. They will only see that a “dangerous sex offender” who “should be locked up forever” is now on the loose because of a “liberal” judge.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x