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

National

ID: Judge Rejects Idaho Sex Offender Registration Lawsuit

A federal judge has rejected a lawsuit challenging Idaho’s sex offender registration laws, but the 134 anonymous sex offenders who brought the lawsuit have the option to refile the case if they can show the current laws caused them actual harm. 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.  
 
24 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I would bet my life savings all 134 can show harm, YES, I SAID ALL 134!!!!

Simple enough. Unfortunately the judge would have to be open to actually seeing the truth, and as he is more than likely politically influenced that won’t happen.

Actually the Registry requirements were ruled to be punitive by another court decision recently. This judge seems out of touch with current events. Maybe this group failed to mention such precesnt.

All 134 experienced harm but proving it is another matter. They may be able to start by submitting sworn testimony in the form of dispositions if not done already, but they have to have corroboration to have a strong case. Like eviction notices. Family burdens. Employment loss. Short story: keep records.

@Not Really

What you are saying is the Millard model currently being used in CO by the Millard atty, et al. @miker (where is he anyway?) used the same model in his doc that’s being used currently.

ID atty should be using this model to get somewhere.

Easy enough to prove submit into evidence a copy of social security input reports that we all get annually. The economic impact of felony conviction drives down personal income. Poor people pay no tax when they are unemployed. The impact upon my income is dramatic in before\,after compared. The same is for anyone connected to sex misbehavior.

So let me see if I understand this correctly. Idaho, Colorado, Pa. et all can bring class actions against the registry, why can’t we in Ca? I mean, really. I am sure that we can scrape up more than 134 plaintiffs. Can you imagine a class action suit with a larger group and the effect it would have. I think it is time Janice. We cannot sit on the sidelines and pea shoot the residency restrictions. The registry itself needs to be challenged. There are plenty of precedents and studies. This is Ca.. we have the biggest pool of plaintiffs… Read more »

I agree with Hookscar, and as I said before ‘the roots need to be pulled, which is the registry. without the registry there would be no IML, housing restriction and etc. As I am saying this and I am and have appreciated the work that Janice and team have been and are doing, which is remarkable. I am setting here, today, unable to attend our daughter’s graduation from Doctor of Medicine, in the Philippines, because of the registry and its stepchildren, the IML and etc.

@HOOKSCAR Class action lawsuit will not do it. The challenges via that method have always proven to be failures. You can get a group of people together to challenge the registry but you have to show individual harm per person within the group. That is how the Millard attorney has put together the case that is currently being appealed at the 10th circuit in Denver by CO AG. As long as each individual person within the group has viable, documented, and able to be testified to through either verbal, recorded, or affidavit methods, you can have a large group and… Read more »

This article has a few more quotes: http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2018/may/28/judge-rejects-idaho-sex-offender-registration-laws/ Like this: ***** “One cannot simply name a large group of Plaintiffs, allege a dozen causes of actions, and expect the Court to figure out which plaintiffs have suffered which harms,” the judge wrote in the ruling released May 17. They’ll also have to show any harm they suffered outweighs the benefits sex registration laws offer society, Nye said. “While the outcome of certain regulations may negatively affect a person socially, economically or even legally, the Court must weigh any competing interests,” the judge found. “Time and time again, Courts have found… Read more »

They’ll also have to show any harm they suffered outweighs the benefits sex registration laws offer society, Nye said. ————————— It is frequently claimed by legislators and by judges and by the media that sex registration laws benefit society. The public believes it too. Yet no evidence exists to substantiate it. On the contrary, scientifically conducted studies have shown that there is little to no benefit to society from the sex offender registry. Therefore, any harm suffered by a registrant because of registration laws outweighs every one of the unsubstantiated imaginary benefits that do not exist in actual fact. This… Read more »

and yet Judges are still human beings and subjected to their emotions. so the question is, how do you introduce logic over emotion and not pizz off the Judge(s)?

I believe the likely effective method is attacking the claim that society actually benefits by focusing on data that shows it may, in fact, actually cause greater harm to society (false sense of security when most offenses are committed by people not registered; inability to reintegrate into society can cause some registrants to commit crimes that integrating would prevent; lumping everything remotely sexual into the registry makes the term “sex offender” meaningless, etc). Judges and others need to be constantly faced with the question “why do you defend a registry that places society – and children – in greater harm?… Read more »

Avoid emotion. A soundly-reasoned and well-presented case that relies on legal facts and reputable studies and social science is the only way. Nobody is sympathetic to the plight of sex offenders, so emotional appeals, besides being legally irrelevant, are useless. Millard is a model.

@Chris F

Thanks for bringing that up for us to read and show it will take a Millard model case filing to get anywhere at a minimum with additions of SDP and BoA challenges. Well written. Individual harm suffered with documentation needs to be noted.

I’ll also mention that those who really want to understand how to fight, must read this article from Catherine Carpenter posted on this very web site:

https://all4consolaws.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Signs-of-Hope-Catherine-Carpenter-Dec-2017.pdf

So why doesn’t’ it have to first be proven that a blanket SO registration actually makes a society safer? How can registering people who had no contact offenses protect society from a person doing a contact offense? How does registering people who had a single offense with a family friend in their home actually protect society from someone who might kidnap? Should we classify all politicians who engage in untruths or unethical acts with those that have felony convictions? True justice will weigh each case by its own merit. Hysterical justice will engage in witch hunts.

I am here TS. I have just been really swamped with this lawsuit and school finals. The rules of evidence and surrounding discovery are complex and are taking every moment of my time. I check in every once in a while but since these rules are so complex and specific a lot of what I am doing is not stuff that many people want to get into because it is so complicated. But never fear I am on it. I am just beginning to understand the entire legal process for litigating a civil case. Whenever I am done I really… Read more »

@miker

Keep shaking the legal tree because eventually you’ll get something good to fall for you. Best of luck on finals.

Just as an example of the complexities of the discovery issues can anyone tell me, without a doubt and cite any source, if the following is subject matter that can be judicially noticed by the court???? 8. 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]… Read more »

I can tell you guys and girls, in my opinion and case some of the most important issues seem indisputably unconstitutional without further due process and a determination beyond a reasonable doubt that the feared characteristic that the government is attempting to prevent, I.E. recidivism rates are justifiable in your individual cases just as Chris states. Good luck proving beyond a reasonable doubt that you are dangerous. Even using so called hearings with psychs or whatever they cannot contradict the stats. Those are hard numbers. just think about it, the stats that are of all released sex offenders and are… Read more »

Hi group,

As I read this article I was thinking this could happen in Texas. I am one of the John Doe’s in the lawsuit.

There’s a better than fair chance of that, sadly. If the lawyer filing your case studies the Millard case from Colorado and follows the same playbook, it may increase your chances of success.

Good luck to you.

sorry, there I go posting all kinds of legalese.

24
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.