ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings


General CommentsGeneral News

General Comments January 2019

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of January 2019. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil.

306 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

What do you guys think about this? that is a 9th circuit case too that was cited. You know I can find NO 9th circuit cases or SCOTUS cases directly addressing privacy issues. The 9th has years ago by citing Doe V Portiz which is a Pennsylvania SC but no others, at least not any with any bite. If any are out there cite em please.

Can it be shown that the “legislative facts on which [the statute] is apparently based could not reasonably be conceived to be true” by the legislature. Clover Leaf Creamery, 449 U.S. at 464, 101 S.Ct. at 724, quoting Vance v. Bradley, 440 U.S. 93, 111, 99 S.Ct. 939, 949, 59 L.Ed.2d 171 (1979). See In re Lara, 731 F.2d 1455, 1460 (9th Cir.1984).

What do you guys think about this? that is a 9th circuit case too that was cited. You know I can find NO 9th circuit cases or SCOTUS cases directly addressing privacy issues. The 9th has years ago by citing Doe V Portiz which is a Pennsylvania SC but no others, at least not any with any bite. If any are out there cite em please. From what I have seen they are violating the 1974 Privacy ACT publishing our addresses specifically, no two ways about it.

Can it be shown that the “legislative facts on which [the statute] is apparently based could not reasonably be conceived to be true” by the legislature. Clover Leaf Creamery, 449 U.S. at 464, 101 S.Ct. at 724, quoting Vance v. Bradley, 440 U.S. 93, 111, 99 S.Ct. 939, 949, 59 L.Ed.2d 171 (1979). See In re Lara, 731 F.2d 1455, 1460 (9th Cir.1984).

Thorne v. City of El Seguendo, 726 F.2d 459, 469-71 (9th Cir. 1984) (stating that government may seek and use information covered by right to privacy if it can show that its use would advance legitimate state interest).
“Disclosure of Plaintiff’s home addresses is prohibited by the Privacy Act of 1974 (Privacy Act), 5 U. S. C. § 552a (1988 ed. and Supp. IV). Disclosure of the home addresses is prohibited by the Privacy Act unless an exception to that Act applies.” Department of Defense v. FLRA, 510 U.S. 487 (1994); “The employee addresses sought by the unions are “records” covered by the broad terms of the Privacy Act.” Id.
The Privacy Act reads in part,
“No agency shall disclose any record which is contained in a system of records by any means of communication to any person, or to another agency, except pursuant to a written request by, or with the prior written consent of, the individual to whom the record pertains, unless disclosure of the record would be … (2) required under section 552 of this title [FOIA].” 5 U. S. C. § 552a(b)(2) (1988 ed. and Supp. IV).
It is well established, and the United States Supreme Court has “stated time and again that courts must presume that a legislature says in a statute what it means and means in a statute what it says there.” Cf. Connecticut Nat. Bank v. Germain, 503 U. S. 249, 253 (1992). “It is true that home addresses often are publicly available through sources such as telephone directories and voter registration lists, but “[i]n an organized society, there are few facts that are not at one time or another divulged to another.” DOJ v. Reporters Comm. for Free Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989), at 763.

This is the only thing possibly relevant, but SCOTUS has stated NO addresses specifically over and over. There are no exceptions in the ACT authorizing the state to do what they are doing. That is why they would not re;ease the addresses under the FOIA because specifically there are no exceptions in the Privacy Act for FOIA and stated if the legislature wants they can amend the Privacy Act or no go.

(7) to another agency or to an instrumentality of any governmental jurisdiction within or
under the control of the United States for a civil or criminal law enforcement activity if
the activity is authorized by law, and if the head of the agency or instrumentality has
made a written request to the agency which maintains the record specifying the
particular portion desired and the law enforcement activity for which the record is
sought;
https://www.justice.gov/opcl/file/844481/download

“Hundreds of sex offenders get their names taken off the sex offender registry every year in Colorado – Sex offender gets off registry, despite victim’s plea” News anchors go apeshit. ////
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/contact7/hundreds-of-sex-offenders-get-their-names-taken-off-the-sex-offender-registry-every-year-in-colorado

The media is exploiting the OUTRAGE CULTURE which is being amplified and magnified on the Internet echo chamber. We’re all collectively witch hunted for profit and viewership!

Welcome to the new abnormal..

Doesn’t appear that people can comment on the article, unfortunately.

The $EX Offender Registries ($ORs) serve no legitimate public safety or law enforcement purpose. The purpose of the $ORs is for gossip, to grow big government bigger, help politicians, and fuel the outrage media. THAT is the use of the $ORs.

Will,

Then email the reporter or use the “Contact Us” feature to email the network. Specifically make the points and ask the questions the reporter should have asked in the first place.

Dustin (February 5, 2019):

Already done. It’s helpful but I would prefer to first target the hundred, thousand, ten thousand, or more that read the actual article. We should not allow people to read dumb things without seeing counterpoints. And again, I think the majority of people in the U.S. will believe and feel what they feel other people want them to. Sheep, you know. So if they see a lot of comments against something, they will lean that way. Many of them MUST be PC.

It is good to influence the writers though because they need write more factually and smarter, rather than just trying to get views.

This is the damn lady’s problem,

After the charges became public, Stillahn said she went from popular cheerleader at Arapahoe High School to social outcast — overnight.
“Kids put together the crying girl in the counseling office was the one on the news, and I was being called a slut,” she said, the emotions still raw almost two decades later. “I had no friends; it was so hurtful.”

I do not care a 14 year old knows what they are doing no matter what our laws state. She is just pissed because she got a touch of same treatment that the adult got.

Also, Liam Neesom facing backlash something he said 30-40 years ago or whenever,
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/liam-neeson-faces-fierce-backlash-for-racist-admission-of-wanting-to-kill-a-black-bastard

Love it when any of these politicians or public figures get a little taste of our treatment in any way. What a frigging not job anyway. As bad as that nut job Mel Gibson.

I think we can all agree that adults should not be having $EX with children below a certain age, whatever that age is. We can assume that children of that age do dumb things, at the very least. So if $EX should occur, it doesn’t matter what the child was doing or not doing. The child could even be begging the adult to have $EX. Taking off their clothes in front of them, whatever. It is still the fault of the adult and that is the only person ultimately responsible. Children are going to be children and do stupid things. (Which makes charging children who commit crimes as adults immoral, but I digress.)

Having said that – F these Registries and everyone who supports them. Because of the Registries, I don’t have any empathy for this victim. I was a victim as a child. Where’s my sympathy? I guarantee what she experienced is not nearly as bad as what I did. So f’ing get over it already. Certainly, it might have been bad. But to be dwelling on it decades later and blaming your problems on it, ughhh, I don’t think so. Unless you were held in a dungeon or something.

And because the Registries exist – F these past victims. I don’t care for them any more than I do anyone else. People who support the Registries are bad people. They’ll be bad people tomorrow, the day after, and years from now. F them.

Its wrong to have sex with a 14 year old. I agree with Will, if you had a child you would understand

You know I really have sympathy and empathy for the lady, but it is not completely

the dude’s fault. Blame it on the real culprits-the MOB. They learn at a very young age how to be the MOB and it just carries over thru the entire lives.

“After he went to prison in 2005 on a probation violation, the son of an attorney went to law school, passed the Colorado bar and now practices law in Denver, focusing on marijuana and criminal defense, according to his firm’s web site.”

Good for him…..

I think I may be on to something here,
Is the court prescience, or can the court in-vision every conceivable situation that may occur in the future? Simply because there were no fundamental rights demonstrated on the record in other similar cases it must follow the logic the it is the same in every case to ever come after, no matter what evidence, facts or assertions are presented in any post-decision case?

Are the vigilante attacks and deaths Plaintiff has documented been a mere consequence of a conviction? How many other criminal offenders has the Court, or the Defendant pointed out that have been murdered by a vigilante because of their criminal conviction?

NEW YORK WOULDNT LET GO ,I can only go by what their info say (ny dept of justice website),unless its old info, anyone who was in jail,probation or did time for a sex crime after 1996 has to register I was off parole in 1990,i lived in ny till 1999,they (ny) passed the registry law in 1996,no one from the police or the nys justice dept informed me on registering but of course I’m no lawyer,and if they go such a route as to painting me a monster,just about anyone who hasn’t been in trouble for 34 years I believe is not a real threat to society…. plus my first offence (not trying to say I’m a saint,but if ny goes by facts this is so) but you know and I know the law was built on lies and deceit peace to all…

.