In April, we wrote about an FAC member currently exiled from his home country because of International Megan’s Law.
One of our members, who has a decades-old conviction, for which he got probation, left the country 17 years ago and hasn’t come back. He went on to live a good life in this other country, established a business, got married and had three children. In October, his mother fell gravely ill and he returned to see her. When he flew into the country (another state) he did what he was supposed to do and registered his one-week stay, letting them know he would be going home on November 7th.
Our country sent a “green notice” to the country he now (and for the past 17 years) lives, warning them of his arrival, flight information and registration flyer. Not surprisingly, the authorities were waiting for him and upon arrival he was immediately turned back. Unwilling to step foot in the US again, he’s currently exiled in a third country, unwilling to be subjected to a lifetime of persecution in the US and unable to return home to his family. He desperately misses them and they miss him.
The state he visited was Illinois and his presence on their registry is what precluded his return to his family.
This happened once in NY but the doe v O’Donnell case allows them to continue to keep registrants on.
Does this guarantee he can go back? Did the other country say they would accept him if he got off the list? I would have thought that once they deny your entry, it could be a number of years before they let you try to came in again. It’s not like Americans have any rights to enter any country. At least he’s off the list now.
If Registries are indeed – as lawmakers endlessly reiterate – entirely intended for Public Safety purposes and not for punishment, then how does any State justify keeping a registrant on their list if that individual no longer resides in that State and is, therefore, in no way a threat to the citizens of that State in which he/she no longer resides!!! Being retained on that State’s registry can ONLY be interpreted as punishment*!
*or as law enforcement being too lazy to remove the person from the list.
What I found interesting in the article is that it says “… the court granted his petition [to be removed from the state’s registry], finding that the individual’s continued presence on the Illinois registry was a grossly disproportionate punishment for the crime, served no benefit to the people of Illinois (as he is no longer there) …”
I’d like to see the court’s opinion to confirm that it found that presence on a registry is punishment.
That flies in the face of Smith v Doe, and may not survive an appeal by the state, if it chooses to do so. I guess it’s too early to know if the state plans to appeal.
Damn ! The attorney in this case Ron Kleiner is Miami Florida based. I wonder what other States he can practice on or take on a case. Or if it matters.
So how does this incident involving IML – which is applied registrants, which itself is retroactively administered – NOT constitute punishment?
Florida -😖 I have lived outside the US for 10 years and I am still on Florida’s list. They have even listed the country I currently live in. I can’t go back, not even when my parents die, as I know I might not make it back here.
So, me and my wife are traveling with our adult daughter to Eastern europe in September. We live in Texas. Does anyone know the rules for notification of international travel from Texas? Is it 21 days?
Thanks for the input. I will definitely post on what happens to us. I keep trying to talk the wife into moving abroad, but I’m not sure if we can get a visa anywhere, since the US has made me a worldwide periah. It’s been over 25 years since my offense, and the lifetime public notification system has designated me a lifetime criminal. Even murderers are given a second chance. It’s hurt my family, and my ability to make money, to be accepted, or feel accepted anywhere, even churches. Nobody says: once a murderer always a murderer, once a thief always a thief, once an adulterer always an adulterer, but once a sex offender? You’re always a sex offender! To even say that someone is “fill in the blank” present tense anything is so unjust. To actuially label them that with a legal document, with no proof that they are present tense actively doing that seems unprecedented. Anyway, I’m ranting.
@ rpsabq: ““those requiring placement on the state registry must register for life.” Well, if a judge rules that the individual does not – or no longer – “requires placement” on the SOR, then that’s that: No longer on SOR.