ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: September 21 – Phone meeting details

Emotional Support Group Meetings (Los Angeles, Sacramento, Phone)

General 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.

Join the discussion

  1. AJ

    This will certainly land in SCOTUS’ lap in a year or two or three:

    “Police Can’t Force Some Phone Unlocks, Judge Says”

    It’s the right ruling, but will it stand? I certainly, and believe, so.

    • TS


      Thanks for the answers to my post on this before you knew I posted it. This will be interesting. The IL case similar to this one should’ve been appealed beyond where it stopped, yes? (See Forbes article I posted)

      Say, did you or anyone else see the Sweetwater, FL LEOs beat down of the registrant’s family captured on their Ring doorbell when they answered the door as the registrant was being sought? FAC has the link. Chief said nothing was wrong in his eyes. Uh huh

      • AJ

        You’re welcome! Let’s see if I can write in complete and proper English this time, too.

        One thing that comes to mind is this was a Magistrate (i.e. hired, not Presidentially appointed) Judge who decided this. I don’t suspect that will really cause a problem in the long run, but it is something the State will probably try to cling to.

        I didn’t see anything beyond a mention of the IL case beyond there having been a similar situation. Why it wasn’t appealed by the non-State party is indeed a good question. Perhaps because it was pre-Carpenter?

        I think the courts, thanks to Carpenter, are quickly changing their stance on how modern technology fits into the 4th and 5th Amendments. About time! This ultra-surveillance by the State *has* to get reined in.

        On a related note:

        The privacy/mass surveillance/police overreach issues all seem to be coming to a head. My desperate hope is the U.S. copies Europe and we get our own GDPR. At minimum, I foresee the Third Party Doctrine getting changed or, even better, destroyed.

        BTW, does “Ajit Pai” mean “assh0le” in some foreign language?

  2. ReadyToFight

    Wish we could start a counter character assassination suit against all this.

    • Tim

      @Cell phone encryption & Surveillance Saints,

      This is an example of the desires of Kings to engage in unreasonable continuous searches.
      Them that own this plantation (Rs) are in no way interested in letting them that run this plantation (Ds) have the combination to the plantation’s safe. Again we are weighing the value of the database use. LEO acting as agents of the government want UNFETTERED ACCESS & USE OF DATABASES! All of them public and private.

      The sex offender was the initial scapegoat that opened the door to domestic electronic surveillance. Paraphrased Mr. Scalia ” I think the U.S government could choose to utilize the people’s databases in any way they deem necessary.” His notion is based in liberty, and has merit so long as it’s use survives congruence of the ratified social compact. While the issue appeared to be about combating sexual aggressiveness against kids as complaints fomented about the government USE of the database machines through those first enslaved to the maintenance of same. Ultimately the unconstitutional uses are proven as the greater threat to national security & sovereignty than the pervert ever was.The swamp is the surveillance saints.
      There is inherent risk absorbed when opting for electronic everything. There is convenience and the price to pay. Bank online or by phone, risk knowingly absorbed! But surely you’ll complain if you’re grifted, or suffer identity theft as I have.
      “Twas mine, tiz his and has been slave to thousands.” W.S.S. Othello

      Believe it or not draining the swamp helps this cause.
      The swamp has had untracked funding via tracked SSI #s.
      The undocumented gained employment for decades via overused # ( firms reiterated and paid per state & fed stat) and those naturally wouldn’t file and get a refund because they needed to use an address & they new the number wasn’t really theirs to use. The definition of slush fund! If DNA exoneration proves anything it proves that no real evidence is needed to convict in the first place. Why no Television coverage? Why is CNN, busting the Don’s hump so hard. I’m sure those folks were present at rallies were Americans and not Russians. A response to the Embassy upgrade?

      As for putting a chill pill on the Saints in any significant AND AMERICAN way is to remove J.G. Roberts via petition. He led the way to the courts abandonment of obligation. He used their Catholic guilt to manipulate. Then he’s REWARDED FOR the dereliction and deception. (a paper petition idea).

  3. AJ

    I’ve had a thought in my head for a few days and would like some feedback.

    According to the Feds, the reason for keeping someone on a registry after moving away (or dying, though that won’t apply here) is so the victim has some knowledge/peace of mind/whatever tripe they concoct. Okay, so what about those who either had no victim (stings) or the victim has no idea the offender offended against them (widely-available CP)? It would seem someone fitting either of these could file an as-applied lawsuit saying there is no rational basis for their continued presence on whatever State’s ML. If the State then argues that it’s in case the POTR comes back, that, too, has no rational basis because a) the POTR must register once back in-state and would be re-published, or b) the POTR can enter and leave before the registration period expires. Also, someone who has moved out of state will of course show no current in-state address, so how is public safety served? Mind you, this isn’t a situation such as crazy-@ss WI or NY, but something less crazy such as FL or MS. What public safety benefit or use is there to someone in FL with info saying “John Doe, living in Kansas”, showing a “threat” that was, but isn’t? What was provides no public safety benefit to what is or is to be.

    I’d appreciate someone shooting holes in this logic. Also, I’m at a loss what basis could be used for a lawsuit, though I lean towards Due Process. It also probably touches on Long Arm statutes, which, as recently detailed, is a snarled mess.

    • NY won’t let go

      The case Doe V O’Donnell actually had another part to it that didn’t make the news as it only effected one guy.

      Doe v O’Donnell basically let NY keep people on the registry after moving away, but for other decision that they split from it, the guy from Pennsylvania was able to be removed as his originating crime wasn’t from NY and he had no ties with it other than working there prior and they felt that it was over reaching to keep him on as he wasn’t a threat. I have the decision on my phone somewhere as I wanted to use it for the basis to have myself removed from the NY registry.

      • AJ

        @NY won’t let go:
        Sounds like the PA portion of O’Donnell is what you need to succeed in your situation. A “simple” as-applied challenge saying you’re similarly situated should do it. That all said, I understand the cost, time, and distance issues associated with that for you. You could get it all done for free (in forma pauperis), but would need to be present in the NY District to do the filing. The alternative, having a lawyer represent you, would save having to be in the US, but of course costs money. What sucks is even if you decide to stick it to NY and stop registering, they’re still going to have your info posted. 🙁

        I recall your mentioning some time ago that you’re a member of a minority class. There may be some sort of legal assistance group that helps this or that minority group or person with legal stuff. I don’t know that, just trying to give you some things to check into. Given the size of NYC and its huge immigrant population, there must be some sort of group…whether they’re willing to help is a whole other story. One example is:, which I found through a search of “chinese american legal help NYC”.

        • NY won’t let go

          Going back to NY is out of the question as I would get stuck in the US afterwards. I emailed the nyclu and am waiting to hear back from them, but not putting much faith in hearing back from them though. As for race based groups, not sure if they would want to touch it as it might tarnish their reputation for helping me 😂

          The cost I was quoted was approximately 1400USD from one lawyer and suggested that we file federally since they ignored her letter to them in regards to the matter in 2017 she said I may be able to get all of the cost back since I’m poor, but the whole process would take a good amount of time.

          Was thinking about forwarding her email directly to the person I have to submit my selfie to every three years or any time I move and see what they have to say about it.

        • NY won’t let go

          Just got a response from the NYCLU

          “I have read your concern. Unfortunately the NYCLU will not be able to provide you with legal assistance in this matter.”😂 as expected

        • AJ

          @NY won’t let go:
          “As for race based groups, not sure if they would want to touch it as it might tarnish their reputation for helping me”
          What does it hurt to contact them? Worst case would seem to be you get a similar reply to what NYCLU sent. Doing nothing certainly gives guaranteed results…

        • NY won’t let go

          Hmmm. This is true, I think for Asian descent only the Chinese seem to have a group for this. At least in English. Will have to break out the translator 😂

    • Tired of this

      I’m interested in this as well. I lived in TX and NV for a time and now live in another state where I’m not published. Both of those states still have me on their websites, though with no other info than “out of state.” Originating offense was in yet another state.

      • NY won’t let go

        That’s nice of them to list you as out of state. NYs has my foreign address listed even though the fed one is showing all blanks and says out of country as I am out of US Jurisdiction but somehow still in NYs

    • Chris f

      I would probably fight it on an equal protection challenge. Since those registries feed the national registry it means similarly situated individuals that lived in other states arent affected by IML, federal housing denial, turned away from disaster shelters, and denied employment beyond the normal 7 years.

      • AJ

        @Chris f:
        Thanks for mentioning the roll up to the Feds that happens and suggesting Equal Protection. I was initially thinking EP, but couldn’t think of a way to get it on the hook.

        I’d still like someone to shoot holes in the argument by coming with any reason, even if totally outlandish, for it to “make sense” to the State or a judge.

    • Responding

      Here’s an abstract thought that would be interesting to try.
      We sue the internet provider for the content, the male or female that lied to us, and the FBI for allowing this to transpire. If the “victim” can sue , why aren’t we victims.

  4. mike r

    So this Gov shutdown. This is interesting, no matter what side of the isle you stand, this should be about the congress ignoring the “Governmental empirical evidence,” the gov’s own experts at the border, and DHS with facts showing that a wall or barriers works. The legislators keep stating a wall or barrier does not work. Um, excuse me, are you an exert on border security? do you have some gov studies showing their is a question as to whether the wall works? is the DHS and border patrol, including all their statistical experts appointed to protect the border and provide facts and expert recommendations, wrong or some how not qualified to be experts? etc.

    When or why do the legislators get to ignore empirical evidence, and the expert authorities statutorily tasked to research and make recommendations? This is a big problem and questions that need to be brought up in the court case that will surely be following whatever outcome comes from this issue.

  5. mot

    I have a question about California and now that it is a Sanctuary State what happens to sex offenders who enter the country and specifically California ILLEGALLY and apply for benefits? Will they have the same restrictions that are imposed on those of us who have to register and be restricted in CA?

    • Lake County

      First, according to my Social Services worker, there are really no benefits available to illegal visitors to CA. if you have children born here, they can get benefits, but not the parents. Of course anyone regardless of status can get emergency medical care. My worker says (unlike what most people believe) they do not qualify for welfare.

      Second, SB54 does allow for the transfer (deportation) of inmates on hundreds of offenses, including assault, battery, sexual abuse and exploitation, rape, crimes endangering children, burglary, robbery, theft, fraud, forgery, a crime resulting in death, gang-related offenses, some domestic violence offenses, drug and weapon-related offenses and felony (but not misdemeanor) driving under the influence convictions.

  6. Frustrated


    Have all RSOs throughout country move to Santa Clara Co.
    Then see if the L.E. Can keep up with the residency checks, annuals, monthlies for the homeless, and all the rest of the B.S. that comes with the registry.
    Can anyone imagine having 900,000 registrants all in one county? The other states would lose their funding , California L.E. Would be drowning in paperwork. , and the public outcry would certainly cause a change in laws.

    • E

      This has been suggested, but not to a CA county: moving to Wyoming. With only 600,000 residents POTRs could take over state government. And send a member of congress and two senators.

      • Frustrated

        True, but then you have to live in Wyoming; cold, nothing to do, and what population that is there is, in a word, conservative?

        • E

          Hey now! Some conservatives hate the registry once they are informed. See 6th circuit decision.

          Regarding the weather…. ya. There’s a reason WY only has 600,000 people. But I’d take the wide open country if it meant sane laws. (All just dreaming, of course.)

        • AJ

          If the 600k living there were outnumbered 4:3 or 3:2 by 800k or 900k POTRs, they 1) wouldn’t have much say about matters and 2) would probably leave for ID like everyone else in the West seems to be doing.

  7. mike r

    There is no conceivable rational basis to keep someone on a state registry, and it is even more irrational if that individual no longer resides in that state. These law makers are out of their minds. Just look at their over all approval ratings and how they are running the country, or I should say not running the country. Anyways, I really like this statement concerning academic studies,

    As an editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association explained, there is “no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial, no literature too biased or too egotistical, no design too warped, no methodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, too obscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self-serving, no argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified, and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print.” Rennie D. “Guarding the guardians: A conference on editorial peer review.” JAMA. 1986; 256:2391-2392.

  8. mike r

    What happens with federal SORNA once an individual is no longer required to register in their home state? I am looking at definitions and statutes and I’ve been unable to find anything affirmatively and specifically stating what happens once an offender is relived of their duty in their home state. I mean, SORNA seems to be describing the crimes that require registration and it is federal law that you have to register and follow all the other IML etc.

  9. mike r

    US Sex Offender Registration Laws – updated September 2018
    I did not even realize, and many others may not know, but up in legal at the top ACSOL gives a complete list of all state laws.

  10. mike r

    “There is no conceivable rational basis to keep someone on a state registry”
    Of course I meant no conceivable rational basis to keep any low risk offenders on a state registry or even moderate to high risk after 8 years according to CASOMB’s own experts, or anyone without individual risk assessments..

  11. Peter

    So I hired a lawyer to go talk to the DA for me to get off the registry. The lawyer called me today and said the DA told him being on the registry is not punishment WTF!!! I was convicted on an internet sting. I was on an adult website the ad was of an adult the nude pictures they sent me was on an adult. I never even did a prelim the day of my prelim the DA told my lawyer I am going to offer this deal if he does the prelim then no deal and we go straight to trial. Me never being in trouble with the law I didn’t no any better and took the advise of my lawyer. The court didn’t think I needed to take classes they didn’t order me to stay away from any one under the age of 18 my fine was $150. The cops took 2 cell phones and my hard drive found no child porn no talking to minors they didn’t find anything. I cant get a job I cant get a loan to open my own business I dont know what to do anymore. Do they want me to start selling drugs and robbing people to feed myself? I find it weird that they dont think I need classes they didn’t give me any restrictions but they think I need to be on a list WTF?

    • NY won’t let go

      This has me confused. So, they convicted you of watching adult porn on an adult website. It makes no sense as to why you should be on the registry or convicted if there was no evidence of anything illegal… is it possible to appeal your conviction? Or petition the judge and get it put through trial?

      • Peter

        I was on looking for a hooker when I got to the location they dropped the age to a 17 year old I said no to sex 4 times after she dropped the age. The cop who pretended to be the underage hooker then calls me and in real life the cop is 45 years old said she needed help with money so I said I would help her and give her money and I was arrested. Because I already made a deal for sex before she dropped the age the DA kept saying that I was going to have sex with her no matter what that why would I give money to a stranger blah blah blah. The police lied on the police report and I have video proof that they lied and the DA didn’t care. I took a deal for 3 years probation 10 years on the registry. My lawyer told me because it was a misdemeanor that I wouldn’t be on the public website but now I am on like 4 different websites and pull up first thing on google when you google my name. My charge is Penal code 288.4a arranging a meeting with a minor for sex. It is such an injustice what happens to us being on the registry. So many lawyers have told me I was better off killing someone then getting a sex case. Every lawyer that looked at my case told me that they gave me the deal they gave me because they wouldn’t of been able to convict me at trial. But most lawyers are scumbags they take our money we go to jail and there drinking on the beach spending our money.

        • NY won’t let go

          If you still have all of the evidence maybe you can submit it to the sentencing judge and ask for a reversal as you had evidence to prove your innocence and you were forced into a plea?

      • RegistrantNotAnOffender

        Assuming he’s not leaving out any key details which… well…

        It’s hard to take back or appeal anything when you plea

        • Peter

          You are right I cant take back my plea deal. My hope is when I apply to get off probation and expungement I will be asking to be off the registry and I am going to provide the proof of my innocence. I was interviewed after my arrest because it was a setup for a tv show. On the police report they said that i admitted to the crime and said that I was horny. My lawyer requested the tape my lawyer requested the contract between the TV station and the police department we didn’t get it my lawyer asked for the operation plan the cops were supposed to follow during the sting they didn’t give it to us. Once I took my deal I saw my arrest on TV and It proved that the cops lied on the police report because I didn’t admit to anything and I said look at the text messages I said no sex. The court system is a joke. Like I said I was arrested and they took 2 cell phones and my hard drive I didn’t plan on getting arrested so I didn’t have time to delete anything I didn’t have no child porn or talking to another minor it was a BS sting. The DA said I shouldn’t of been trying to have sex with a hooker in the first place and yes I shouldn’t have but it doesn’t give the court the right to take my life away.

        • Will Allen

          Peter (January 18, 2019):

          Couple of things:

          Police activity should not be televised for entertainment. It’s immoral. It makes a joke out of law enforcement and something that should be serious. Law enforcement deserves all of the disrespect and contempt that they get and more. Televising some of it could be appropriate if it were for an educational purpose.

          Let’s get serious about living in a free world. There has been a LOT of terrible activities in the past (like wars). Let’s concentrate on everyone leaving everyone else alone and all living free and great lives. ANYONE that tries to interfere with that deserves to die. They are war criminals committing war crimes. So … paying for $EX absolutely should not be anyone’s business or even dreamed of being illegal. That DA that said you “shouldn’t of been trying to have $EX with a hooker” needs to go F him/herself, learn to mind their own damn business, and get something of a life.

          Let’s be serious about freedom.

        • RegistrantNotAnOffender

          Probation is a trap I have a friend who took a felony and some prison time to avoid treatment in the registry. I realize he was smarter than most.

        • Chris f (@peter)

          Peter, are you able to get another lawyer to claim innefective counsel to get your plea removed?

        • AJ

          Something doesn’t add up to me. Everything else aside, if you truly felt you were innocent of a crime (any crime) based on known details and recordings–items that could be presented in court–why would you take a plea deal? For me, if there’s forensic evidence (video, texts) confirming my belief and statements that I neither intended to violate nor actually violated the law, I would never–ever–accept a plea. (Also, in at least some States a judge is prohibited from accepting a plea from someone s/he believes *may* be innocent.) That the DA was trying to slant the case in the State’s favor is a no-brainer. That’s their job, and they have no incentive otherwise. *Your* attorney is supposed to do the same for you and, if all you said is correct and complete, failed to do so. (What even half-competent defense attorney tells a client to accept a plea when the attorney is made aware–by the client!–of exculpatory evidence!?!? At minimum, the attorney needs to press for discovery and review of the items.)

          Depending on how recent this is and the availability of the forensics, you could perhaps make claim regarding the competency of your legal counsel. That most likely entails finding another attorney (read: expense) and filing motions, etc. It could be done pro se, but I suspect a steep hill in doing so. If your attorney truly did seek discovery regarding the contract and the ops plan and was rebuffed, and then didn’t pursue it, that starts to point toward incompetent counsel. If the State, regardless what channel, withholds exculpatory evidence, you have not only a case for retrial, but possibly for sanctions and penalties against the DA and/or PD. You also may want to look into whether your State (CA?) allows someone to withdraw a plea. If it does, it will probably need to be based on something other than changing your mind (i.e. poor legal counsel).

          As I said above, something add up. Who accepts ANY sort of conviction, regardless the offense and regardless the (relatively light) sentence, if s/he truly believes himself/herself innocent of the charges and *knows* there is evidence to support innocence (or at least reasonable doubt as to guilt)?

  12. bill

    Any one heard anything on Snyder V doe II, from Mi?

  13. mike r

    Man I hate to say it, but you would be crazy to take a deal in the situation that you explained if everything is on spot. I would have fought it to the end. I get that it is smart to take a deal in certain situations, but if you are innocent I would never take a deal and I would never stop fighting it either until all avenues were exhausted. Do not get me wrong, I am not saying it makes anyone weaker or dumber or smarter, it is just a personal call. I would have been much better off taking my 8 months alternative sentence and probation and one charge instead of doing 2.5 years in the pen, but that’s me, not the sharpest I guess. I was innocent of the base felony charges and I was not taking it lying down. So I am still fighting 15 years later by fighting to get off the registry. If I do not succeed here it is on to state court, that will be about the final stage I guess.

    Anyways in your case, entrapment, ineffective counsel, insufficient evidence, procuring an arrest without probable cause, malicious prosecution, withholding exculpatory evidence, I am sure there are a few more in there.
    Disclaimer for USA, I am not an attorney, anything I say is opinion and not to be taking as legal advice. Hows that USA? LMAO….

    • RegistrantNotAnOffender

      Its not uncommon on these sites to hear people who were completely innocent but took a deal even though the state had “No action.” I hear it so often I don’t buy it anymore.

      • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

        You know, it’s funny but it would never occur to me to judge the guilt of others on the Registry or to scrutinize messages posted here for signs of guilt/witchcraft. I’m not sure where that comes from but suspect that it’s a habit acquired by a society which is always looking for symptoms of guilt in sex offenders. It’s a very unattractive trait in its own right and can only serve to divide.

    • Peter

      I took a plea deal because my dad is 70 years old and i was facing years in prison My dad cried and told me that if i lost at trial i would be doing years in jail and that he would die with me in jail and he didn’t want that to happen. My lawyer never even showed up to court with me he only showed up the first court appearance and his assistant would show up to court the rest of the time. One time I showed up to court and they court didnt know were my file was and they had me come back a month later. I was looking for a hooker I know if I took it to trail I would of lost because i was on a website for hookers. I wasn’t looking for a minor its like going to a BBQ place looking for sushi it just doesn’t make sense. I live in CA I was in 8 newspapers a TV show Chris Hansen and his crew interviewed me after my arrest for 30 seconds and the police lied and said I admitted to the crime and said I was horny But I have the tape and I didn’t say that I denied everything but still the cops lied. I was even in a newspaper in Florida like why is an arrest in CA have to do with Florida? The deck was stacked against me from the start. I was arrested with 3 other people. My lawyer told me and my family I would loose no matter what. His exact words were the police will show up in the brand new uniforms on white horses and we will show up in all black. He said people especially women wont like that I was looking for a hooker and that because I am not white I have no chance in the legal system. I thank all of you for letting me vent this website gives me hope I feel bad for everyone in my shoes. Some people deserve the punishment but a lot of us dont. My brother in law is a lawyer but not criminal him and his co worker were at a bar and his co worker peed outside a cop saw him and he is now registered he lost his job his house all for taking a piss outside. This country is crazy about sex offenders but every single person in america is a sex offender according to the law.

  14. mike r

    Hey sounds about right, AJ and I hit on all the same points pretty much. Although once again, for disclaimer USA, my opinion lol. I will NEVER let an attorney represent me again if it was something so important as this. I do not care, I would make a mockery out of it if I must if I did not know what I was doing, I repeat I would not care, the court would have to deal with it and guide me because if you stick to pro se in a criminal trial it is actually in your favor as the court has to address your issues and arguments regardless if you are smart or knowledgeable of the legal system. As long as you know what issues and claims you want to make who needs an attorney to talk you out of it or manipulate your claims as they see fit. Screw that, it is your life not theirs and NONE of them give a real shit about you. Ain’t no sweat off their ass if you go to prison. And you only get the one shot my friend if you go to trial, then it is appeals on the record only. I was under a contract as well and the frigging judge would not even let the jury see the contract or bring it up, my PD said nothing, screw that I would be jumping up and down in front of the jury telling them the judge is withholding evidence and they would have to put me in contempt and lock me up and have the trial without if I had it to do all over again if they did not let me pro se. If everything you state is true it is a no brainer as AJ states. Put it in front of a jury and fight for your life and DO NOT let them intimidate you in any way to budge from your claims and arguments or into not representing yourself as they did me finally in the end. They are your enemy and at war with you in that court room. The jury are ordinary people and look unfavorable at the cops and DA in many cases. If a jury heard your story there is no way, well cannot ever guarantee anything with the courts, but highly unlikely they would get a conviction under your circumstances, and as AJ stated, I would never plea if there was a chance I could win. I actually would not no matter what, unless I was actually guilty of the crime but that is just me.

  15. mike r

    Hell, in your position I would not even bother going back to the criminal element of your case at this time, I would go directly to civil court and sue the hell out of them for a couple million and get an injunction and declaratory judgement against all the individuals involved in your case that have violated your rights and caused you harm. Hell research it, file a summary judgment, it sound like there are no disputable facts that these individuals have violated your rights and are causing you continuous harm. Summary judgement motions seem pretty complex and they are a little, but it is in the range of anyone of average intelligence. Then after you get that cash payout go back in and withdraw your plea with that civil decision as back up. Use the civil court as a primer and see how convincing you can be.

  16. Not worth the time

    I was told by a person at group counseling to check out this site.
    I have been doing so for a while and have come to the conclusion that it like every other opinion forum. 5 or 6 people post their thoughts on some subject listed and that’s it.
    Even worse, most of the subject matter is depressing and the responses are self serving. It would be nice to have knowledgeable authorities chime in instead of the “library lawyers” that have a response to EVERY article.
    I spoke to a fellow RSO and we agreed that nothing we can do will change the legal landscape ( a weed in a field of weeds if you will ). The current senate proposal will have many of us off the registry in a few yrs. from there I will put this behind me. I have had no issues with the “system” since my conviction. No jail, small fine, and life has gone on. My life certainly isn’t the same, but then shit happens, and I roll with it. Life could end tomorrow or in 40 yrs. , bitchin’ About how you got screwed won’t make a difference. And in today’s world, only money and public opinion matters.
    You folks keep up “ the fight” though, if it keeps you warm at night.

    • TN RC

      What “current senate proposal”?

    • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

      Thank you for letting us know that you are not worth the time.

    • Chris f

      Funny how often someone with the same exact opinion as the “USA” guy on here magically appears…and will disappear…without ever actually engaging in discussions.

      But I will bite again…cause I am bored.

      Why were you told to look at this site if you obviously have no gripes with your situation? And then keep coming back?

      Do you not think there is a reason this site has 4 or 5 “library lawyers” and no real attorneys chiming in? You already stated its the same as other forums. What’s your solution? People should just shut up and take it? That’s absolutely rediculous.

      It’s common sense why no lawyers post here or actually help the cause. There is no money or peer benefit to doing so. Fighting for or helping sex offenders (who usually have no money) would only get a lawyer ostracized by friends, family, and peers. They also dont work for, or provide opinions for free other than answering a brief question on avvo in hopes of getting a paying client.

      Even worse, many attorneys claim they will help you, and then screw you over and take your money and get you a bad deal. Then they brag to their friends, family, and peers about it and dont lose a minutrs sleep. That is exactly what I found out happend to me a year after taking a deal and the Bar did nothing for 5 years until they finally had about 8 similar complaints.

      Anyone with half a brain and some time needs to chime in on here and do their own research. Those that don’t meet both of that criteria can feel free to watch and help out in any other way they can through donations, educating others, and positive encouragement.

      In no case is the “USA” method of keeping to yourself and leaving our fate in the hands of self serving elected officials and money grabbing lawyers the proper solution

    • RegistrantNotAnOffender

      People have many different reasons for coming here. For me, I like to be informed and have support. Most sex offenders isolate themselves either out of shame or restriction (internet bans)

      The argument for needing professionals on this site is kind of silly. Lawyers, therapist — everyone in America has their cost. If you need to feel coddled you’re right this is not the place for it.

      • Derek Logue

        Interesting how you want to bash people with your coddling comment yet you want to criticise me at other sites for being bold and brave and not coward down. What are YOU doing for the cause “RegistrantNotOffender”? What is YOUR contribution to the cause, besides criticism?

        • RegistrantNotAnOffender

          Untouchable is the first film to really speak up for us and you want to throw it under the bus because it’s not all about how evil the Books are. The Books only affect Floridians the registry affects all of us!

    • Joe

      Yes, it is very annoying and totally unacceptable that professionals like lawyers, doctors or CPAs etc refuse to render their services for free. Surely they must realize that going to school for years at six figure expense, passing grueling exams and then competing in the free market to gain experience obligates them to utilize their potential free of charge, over the internet and absent any kind of professional relationship. Could not agree more… 🙂

      Sure, qvetching on this forum will do little to change the legal landscape. But fret not, there is more to this organization than this web site. Consider (just off the top of my head)

      – attending a monthly meeting (there is one next Saturday)
      – attend the lobbying session at the State Capitol next month (you will meet with actual decision makers)
      – attending the Conference this June. Hey, this from the first announcement. “In addition, the conference will include for the first time a forum in which registrants and loved ones can ask questions and receive answers from attorneys and psychologists.”
      – finding out how you can get involved / volunteer your time
      – making a financial contribution
      – expressing a shred of gratitude to the volunteers who run this organization / web site and all the concrete results they have achieved in the legislative / judicial arena – contrary to your belief that they are useless and ineffective
      – learning from the arm chair lawyers on this forum. Many of whom know their stuff better than actual lawyers. And even from the “bad” ones. And then try to help others.

      Sure, all this sounds laborious and time consuming and expensive. Then again, if relief from registration is not worth your time or money, then maybe registration is not such a big deal. Life goes on.

      At this point, a big fat thank you to all involved at ACSOL. Such an organization does not form and run itself. The initial and ongoing legal / financial / tax requirements are not for the faint of heart. A web site like this is not created and maintained by itself. A conference with national experts does not just fall into place. Organizing a full day of meetings with legislators is something people get paid a lot of money for. Etc etc. Thank you ACSOL.

      • Chris f

        Totally agree Joe.

        I wouldn’t be doing it for free either if I had student loans for law school.

        It’s a shame we don’t have a legal system that offers a proper way to challenge this. Unless the few lawyers like Janice, and as many “library lawyers” we can get with skin in the game will pool resources and find ways to tackle this it will go on indefinitely. This isnt like issues with blacks or gays where eventually people change their mind and common sense kicks in to over ride prejudice. Sex offenders will never be accepted, So the fights for being treated fairly in a way that actually benefits society will not come easily or by normal methods.

        • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

          Chris: “This isnt like issues with blacks or gays where eventually people change their mind and common sense kicks in to over ride prejudice. Sex offenders will never be accepted…” Chris, we’re not an amorphous, indistinguishable group. While we’re all in the same boat, we took many different routes to get to that boat with some, dare I say, having employed less sympathetic conveyances than others. And inevitably, some WILL be more like “blacks and gays” than others. Add to that the fact that culture does change over time, albeit painfully slowly and “sex offender,” as a unit of social currency freighted with today’s understanding, will inevitably lose its fungibility. Until then, we need to cohere as a common fighting unit to the greatest extent possible.

        • Chris f (@d.k.)

          While I agree we are a diverse group taking different paths to get here and be lumped together, I have to disagree that public reaction and fear will subside at any rate similar to public gay and race acceptance and tolerance and never to that level of acceptance.

          Even with some of us being in this position due to things out of our control happening to us in our youth to set us on a path to an offence, society is unlikely to budge much and will resist wasting their time to understand and help to fix the underlying problem.

          Unless the courts start to force society to see the issues through unpopular decisions, I cant see it happening the other way around where society starts to bend first and signal to the justices that its ok to uphold the constitution again in regards to sex offences.

        • RegistrantNotAnOffender

          Notorious , even though I can appreciate your optimism, the reason the term sex offender is unlikely to lose its power is because people will continue to be parents in fear for the safety of their children and others will recall abuse they suffered as children. I don’t think society will ever allow itself to accept registrants until it grows a few more million

        • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

          Chris, all I have to do is to look at how much society has changed in my lifetime to know that predicting its future is a fool’s errand. If I could persuade others here of but one thing it would be to disabuse them of the notion that they can foresee societal attitudes beyond their own experience. Unless you have a functioning crystal ball, stop saying “never.”

        • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

          Registrant, it’s not optimism, it’s an awareness that things change in ways few can anticipate. I would make the point to you and Chris that attitudes to gays when I was a kid were so bad that very few could anticipate a time in which those attitudes would lose their overwhelming grip on society. Similarly, few then could imagine a time when religion and traditional family units would no longer so completely dominate culture. Today, it is inconceivable that the military draft could be reconstituted and send hundreds-of-thousands of young men to involuntarily fight a flagrantly immoral war. That wasn’t true in 1965. To imagine that you can make assumptions about societal change well into the future is a fallacy. It’s not just that attitudes CAN change dramatically but that they almost invariably DO change dramatically. It’s just a matter of “when.” And it always takes us by surprise and few will have the imagination to predict it.

        • RegistrantNotAnOffender

          Well a huge difference is that science has come forward to suggest that people are born gay because sex offenses happen out of choice I just don’t see the majority of people ever having mercy for it. Even at a young age when they would send those flyers home whenever sex offender moved near the school our fear of offenders starts young

        • Chris f (@ D. K.)

          Sorry David, I usually agree with a lot of your opinions but I see no major changes in how society deals with people committing crimes.

          Gays and blacks were hated or supressed because they were different and not understood by the majority.

          Criminals are hated and feared for crimes and taking advantage of another person. Society will never accept that nor should it. Society’s treatment of criminals will have the best hopes of leniency through the court.

        • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

          Chris, if your assumption is that these laws are all correct in their essence and that everyone being punished by them is rightfully guilty and worthy of punishment, then I can see why you would not want to challenge their legitimacy nor welcome any prospect for their critical reexamination, and possible elimination – simply because it’s what you want and what you’re morally invested in. I do not hold that view. We have suffered decades of category expansion in the domain of “sex offender” laws which now include many things that would never have been previously prosecuted. For one thing, we have seen the expansion of laws into behaviors that are clearly affectional rather than overtly sexual. There are people in prison today for kisses and hugs, backrubs and frank conversation as well as so-called “grooming” which gets to mean whatever they want it to mean. These areas are most ripe for reevaluation by a thoughtful citizenry were they to be made aware of it, which they are not. I’m not saying that that will happen anytime soon but to imagine that our society has suddenly become uncharacteristically stable and fixed into perpetuity would be to see it as it has never actually been. I would suggest that this is a failure of imagination.

        • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

          One other thing Chris, if you use the criminal vs. not-a-criminal framing for your argument with gays being “not-a-criminal” and “sex offenders” being, well “offensive” and thus criminal, then it fails to identify the criminalism of gays before they became “not-criminals.” Society as it was then constituted saw homosexuality very much as a crime and is all the more remarkable for having eventually come to a completely different conceptualization of gays. Gays WERE “sex offenders” but no longer are. As I pointed out in my last message, the reverse has also happened with today’s “sex offenders.” While gays were becoming less criminal others of us were becoming more criminal through the addition of untold numbers of laws which criminalized previously legal behavior (and this wasn’t a coincidence but rather, a grand bargain). You may want to ask yourself if you are making essential distinctions between actions giving rise to “sex offender” convictions. My experience with many of today’s “offenders” is that they went through a programming process called SOTP which actively discourages making such distinctions. In the process of tearing-down the individual to build him back up into the therapist’s target image – which is what they do – the “offender” thus-treated adopts an absolutist’s perception of “offending.” This may be of some utility when dealing with genuinely dangerous and, not coincidentally, low-functioning people but is a cookie-cutter approach applied indiscriminately which, amongst many other things, devalues critical thinking.

  17. AJ

    This could be interesting: “ACLU sues government over social media surveillance”

    This may help build a base for a better, stronger challenge to 34 USC 20917. There’s an embedded URL to the ACLU site where you can d/l the rather brief Complaint.

  18. mike r

    “I spoke to a fellow RSO and we agreed that nothing we can do will change the legal landscape ( a weed in a field of weeds if you will )”
    You could not count how many inmates, guards, sergeants, captains, lawyers, etc told me I could not win when I filed my appeal for half time while locked up. Well against all odds I got it, and “No jail, small fine, and life has gone on.” Some are affected more than others by this registry and have done a lot more than no jail time. And many more are still being effected severely in many cases. I agree, it would be nice to get some professionals on here and I have recommended it a few times, but it is not going to happen. We who wish to fight are on our own. Many Pro Se cases have been won, and hoping mine will be the next. Never happen unless someone tries. I really think my most recent filings with the judicial notice is as good as it gets, more evidence and better/more arguments than any lawyer has brought any where at this point. Call it bragging or whatever you want, it is just fact.

    Pro se do win.
    Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
    Gideon was an uneducated and destitute drifter charged in Florida with breaking and entering for the purpose of committing a petty theft.
    Robert Kearns, the guy who invented the intermittent windshield wiper

    Ask AJ he can probably name a hundred successful pro se cases.

    • AJ

      @mike r:
      “Ask AJ he can probably name a hundred successful pro se cases”
      While I appreciate the confidence, that’s a tall order to fill…and one which I cannot.

  19. mike r

    Well there are a lot anyways, and I have won demurs, 602 appeals, minor civil suit cases, even beat a DUI case at DMV….
    Also, IDK Chris, punctuation and grammar is close to alright so it may just be another in the same vein as USA, or you could be right, good observation for sure. It sure sounds like that same garbage. AJ, biting your tongue. Got to watch that blood, do not get any on your shirt, hell to get out, lmao.. You guys all hit it already so I will leave it at that.
    And that is a bill and not just a proposal anymore, SB 384 to be exact, that is still in the making even though it is already signed into law, crazy I know, here is a blank check legislators, fill in the blanks by 2021 and its all cool. Puts way more people on then it takes off in its current form.

  20. America's Most Hated

    I think I have my passport letter. I just got home from out of town and have a pink notice from the USPS saying they tried to deliver a certified letter. I will go see tomorrow (Monday).

    At least I can get it over with before my next travel attempt instead of worrying that I will arrive in Spain and find out my passport has been cancelled.

    • TS

      @America’s most hated

      Post Office is closed tomorrow, January 21st, due to a Federal holiday so you won’t get anybody if you go by.

      • America's Most Hated

        Oh man. I have been awake all night ready to go get that letter and an application for a new passport so I could get it over with. I forgot it was Martin Luther King Boulevard Day.

        • David

          @A.M.H.: it is more likely that you will be stopped at the airport BEFORE departing from the US.
          If your passport has been revoked then it’s been flagged and U.S. DHS/airport border/ customs agents will not allow you to board your international flight because your passport will no longer be any good.

    • Facts should matter

      You might as well go ahead and get mad now and get it over with because certified letter is exactly what you think it is.

      • America's Most Hated

        I have been angry and bitter for 12 years since the govt ripped away the beautiful life I had. Often times I just want to give up. Just check out and be done. But that gives the govt a win. This is what they want. For all of us just to stick a gun in our mouths and pull the trigger. The agents will all high five that another one bites a bullet. I hope they all get ass cancer and it hurts.

        • RegistrantNotAnOffender

          Yup, we prove them wrong when we don’t give up and don’t reoffend. Every day we are alive we are winning. In the untouchable movie someone said we should round them up and shoot them. Why give them any satisfaction? Success may look differently than it did before but that’s okay. Hang in there my brother.

  21. Matthew LL

    Move over Sex Offenders, the list is about to get bigger. Meet your soon to be fellow Domestic Violence Registraint brethren. Washington State has both a House and Senate bill creating a public domestic violence registry working its way through the legislature. Here is how the Senate bill starts out…..

    NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. The legislature finds that domestic violence is a serious and pervasive issue facing many Washington families and communities, and many of the most severe crimes that occur in this state are those involving intimate partner and family violence. Domestic violence offenses carry wide ranging effects, including injury to mental and physical health, erosion of economic and housing stability, and vicarious victimization of children, who are often bystander witnesses. Washington state data demonstrates a high rate of reoffense among perpetrators of domestic violence, and there is currently no way of knowing whether any particular person has an offense history in absence of a criminal background check or court records request.
    The establishment of a searchable public registry of serious domestic violence offenders is an important step toward preventing future victimization and reducing overall rates of domestic violence.

    • America's Most Hated

      For one, I am for it. If I have to be on a public sh1tlist then I want everyone else to also endure the shame for any sin they ever committed.

      But this list is also bollocks. Who is it protecting? Is it just meant to insure that any man accused of yelling at an ex never gets to have a relationship again because any future mate can see what a jerk he is because the govt says so?

      Yep. I am for it. Misery loves company. Let’s put everyone on a list. DUIs, Shoplifters, Bar Fights, everyone.

    • TS

      At the petition2congress website yesterday, I saw a national petition for a national animal abuse registry with well over 130k signatures to elected officials and POTUS. I don’t know the traction of such an effort at that level, but plenty are for the idea of them regardless.

      • America's Most Hated

        Lol. A registry for animal abusers? Can dogs use Google now? Who is this protecting?

        But yeah. Do it. If I am a piece of garbage for clicking on photos of 16 year old Russian girls that were paid to voluntarily pose nude, then by god an animal abuser should have a list, too.

      • ao

        @TS, I wonder if this register will also include presence restrictions like not being able to be on the grounds of any dog parks or shelters or being able to live too close to them, as well as getting green notices sent out when they travel internationally, since surely any trip abroad will mean they want to attend the local cock-fighting ring.

  22. Matt

    Interesting/Ironic news this morning: I was reading about the kids in the MAGA hats who got in a confrontation with a group of African Americans, and then Native Americans. It seems the story has changed as new information has come out. But several stories mentioned how the kids from the Catholic school were being “Doxed”. I’m old, and not up on all the lingo. I didn’t know what “Doxing” meant so I looked it up. The registry is a legal and accepted form of Doxing, as it turns out. And it seems that everybody in the country thinks Doxing is a bad thing………unless those being Doxed are Registered former Sex Offenders. Then it’s okay. The hypocrisy of our society never ceases to amaze me.

    • Facts should matter

      The earliest occurrence of doxxing was in 1925 when the names, addresses and occupations of the KKK were published in Chicago via newspapers and town hall billboards.

      ^Read the last paragraph

      We have to PAY to be doxxed! Then of course we’re sitting ducks and soft targets because we can’t move. When we do move, we’re even MORE at risk as it stirs up emotional hysteria, animosity and resentment with the new neighbors once those email “alerts” are sent out.

      How is this not a form of torture and terrorism????

    • New Person

      How were gangsters were removed from the registry program, but sex offenders were put on it in California?

      See how that happened and if that train of thought can be used in CA.

  23. Brandon

    The red notice was indeed from the Stank Department. I got my new photo at Walgreens and mailed it back in. But I may not get my passport. On the page where they advise me I have been convicted of a sex offense against a child, I wrote, “This is bullshit and you jerkoffs know it.”

    • Will Allen

      Nice!! But “jerkoffs” is way to nice. And we need to tell these people to go F themselves EVERY SINGLE TIME that we speak to them. For any reason. “Thank you and go F yourselves” Every single time. They need to feel like the scumbags that they are.

  24. America's Most Hated

    I would like to start a travel site for registrants. I would like to have forums where we can all talk. I will pay for everything. Does anyone know how to do this? I have been trying to find a prebuilt forums site to sign up for, but it’s apparently not that simple. Anyone? Help please?

    • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

      America’s: try going here: There seem to be a few completely free options worth looking at. A “have registration, will travel” site would be a welcome addition for many of us.

    • David

      Why do you want to re-invent the wheel? The R-Tag website already provides information about registrant travel.

      • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

        One feature that is lacking on RTAG is a forum for discussion of experiences with individual countries. It’s not enough to just state which countries have been known to refuse entrance of registrants – we need a two-way dialog between those affected as well as a repository of self-reported experiences. This then becomes a much more valuable resource. Add to that the fact that RTAG does not appear to be a group with voting members who can affect the group’s policy or that its tactic seems to be to lobby Mexico to let in SOME registrants with the possibility of adding other countries to that effort in the future. Not everyone is convinced that that is the way to deal with the injustice of IML.

  25. Alan

    Just curious, why does the 5th amendment NOT apply when registering? It seems like a catch 22, if you move, you shouldn’t be compelled to put an address. But if you haven’t moved there is no threat of punishment to be avoided. Idk.

    • RegistrantNotAnOffender

      If I remember correctly the fifth amendment only protects you when you have committed a crime and are being questioned about it. That said you’re still legally required to give the police your name when questioned.

      Typically when you’re sentenced the registration requirement is a part of your sentence. I suppose you can accept an indeterminate sentence or some civil commitment if you really don’t want to register

  26. mike r

    Man our country’s constitutional foundation is really being tested right now on all fronts. No matter what side of the isle you are on politically, after the smoke clears we will see if the founders really created a document that can withstand this political assault. And then you have the other end where the Gov is registering people. Another fundamental assault on the constitution. If it stands that registering people like animals then it is over. It is not yet as the right case and arguments have not been presented to the right court so once again we will see. What a ride and time to be alive.

    • R M

      “Man our country’s constitutional foundation is really being tested right now on all fronts”… so true.

      I have been following what’s called “1st amendment auditors” on a globally known social media platform the last few months. Still today, so many people don’t even understand or abide by the 1st amendment (freedom of speech, press, religion, assembly, petitioning); quite a few of these auditors are being harassed, arrested, beaten, and/or civilly violated by law enforcement, security, all types of government officials, and even civilians… with close to 100% of them winning their cases.

      • AJ

        @R M:
        I love watching those videos, and am not at all surprised by the reaction from the Thin Blue Liars. Bodycams are the next thing the TBLs have to overcome, which they do by “forgetting” to turn them on when leave their donutmobiles, or they mute the audio. Or, like the one idiot crooked TBL in Baltimore, records himself planting drugs and then “finding” the supposedly hidden drugs. (

        Yeah, we’re supposed to trust them. Sure, it’s just one bad apple. Well guess what, one bad apple spoils the barrel. Put another way, pour a cup of fine wine into a container of slop, you get slop; pour a cup of slop into a container of fine wine, you get slop. You’re only as good as your sh!ttiest employee.

        • R M

          Don’t forget that they have deleted video too.

          I saw that vid before and looked at it again just now “Prosecutors said the video prompted them to drop more than 110 cases involving the three officers in the video from Pinheiro’s camera.” Woot! None the less the “suspect” spent 6 months plus in jail.

  27. mike r

    Divide and concur. That is what the ruling class is attempting to do, and they appear to be doing a good job. Only one side is screaming racist and blatantly dividing the country and trying to shut down any contrary thought or conversation. Just saying.

  28. Chris f (@ D. K.)

    Bringing our discussion down here…

    David, I think you are reading too much into what I said. I am not saying that there arent plenty of things registerable that need not be. There shouldn’t be any registry.

    What I am saying is that the public is never going to retreat from anger and hatred of those that committed actual harmful sex crimes against another person. Unlike gays and blacks that the public became educated about and more tollerant of, and at a mid point in that process the courts finally did their job to speed up the process, the actual damaging sex offenders will never get the publics sympathy or understanding. That is the difference.

  29. mike r

    I like that last aspect “petition.” That is what needs to happen all over the US. If everyone slammed the courts with suit then we would have something happen. When it is just one here or one there unless they are very skilled the courts can just shoot it down and not worry about repercussions really. Just as I think it was the Taylor case where after the original people filed and the case was on its way, everyone in San Diego county on parole filed which forced the court to take notice. I wish that everyone on here would go file in federal court whatever district they are in and use the same claims that I have used. This would make the court take notice, but whatever, I will give it my best as a lone wolf.

    • Chris f

      At least one benefit of your lone wolf approach is that you control everything and dont have to water anything down or leave off stuff that some lawyer would be afraid to tackle because it is out of his wheel house.

      Hopefully whatever aspect of your lawsuit gets traction will lead to a bigger suit that builds on it.

      So many lawyer driven suits are based on anothers argument or success that a fresh approach is rare and almost unheard of.

      I have yet to see a suit other than yours that even mentions the legislature over stepping and interfering with the judiciary.

  30. AJ

    “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” –Voltaire

    Succinctly describes SORs.

    Maybe this is what needs to be sent to “Coach” every week in those emails. 🙂

    • Josh

      That quote from Voltaire will sail right over coach’s head……you don’t want to confuse the angry little man anymore!

  31. Mot

    Within the past week in So Calif there have been multiple arrests for sexual molestation of children by employees of schools and churches. The news reports stated that full background checks had been made for each of the accused. So the Registry did NOT protect those children but has costs millions of dollars to LE. When will common sense kick in to show that the majority of us on the Registry will never re offend but it is the first time offenders; as we all were once.

    • AJ

      😮 What?!? You mean background checks aren’t panaceas? Next thing I know you’ll be saying registries don’t work.

      • mot

        Funny a background check cannot find what you have not been caught doing? Like the Registry cannot predicts that we will offend again

  32. mike r

    I heard this idiot on the news talking about a new gun law in New York and was trying to make the case that SCOTUS should not be interfering in a state’s democratic process and because 8 million plus voted for the law it should stand. Loved the answer the opposition gave him that if that was the case the guy who was claiming this would still be a slave as he was black. Guy had no come back other than “there is no comparison.” Shit too. Might as well get rid of SCOTUS under his logic. The case is going to be huge and is going to set the stage about how the court may expand the second amendment or cave to the states.

    “The request for review came from the New York State Pistol and Rifle Association and a group of gun owners who live in the city. They were challenging the city’s ban on transferring even licensed, unloaded guns anywhere outside the city limits – including to a weekend home or shooting range for target practice – restrictions they describe as “draconian.” After the lower courts rejected their challenge and upheld the restrictions, the NYSPRA and gun owners went to the Supreme Court.”

    The case is New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. New York.

    • AJ

      @mike r:
      “I heard this idiot on the news talking about a new gun law in New York and was trying to make the case that SCOTUS should not be interfering in a state’s democratic process and because 8 million plus voted for the law it should stand.”
      At the risk inherent in touching a third rail…I wonder if these same people feel that way about Roe v. Wade. Isn’t that, too, “interfering in a state’s democratic process”? Wait, didn’t SC try this in the 1860s? Nullification, anyone?

  33. Non diagnosed

    Since my release from probation, I have sought out a decent Phsycologist to talk to. After much searching, I found one. They spent three sessions and told me I had suffered through all the childhood trauma that perpetuated BPD. This was exasperated by my military service. Then suffered a loss of loved one that finalized what ended up being a bad choice (CP). I literally can go down the symptoms of BPD from adolescence to adulthood and associate with ALL of them!
    The down side is that while meds can address (maybe) the resulting emotional effects (depression, anxiety, mood swings, self harm), the underlining causes:
    Sexual abuse by mother
    Physical abuse by stepfather
    Abandonment by biological father
    Isolation by frequent relocation ( 7 schools in 5 yrs )
    Did enough damage early that the doctor said that my offense could be almost expected.
    Now, why isn’t this type of professional information taken into account when addressing this by the court.
    My lawyer got me into counseling immediately after my arrest, but nothing was said about possible “issues” .
    It wasn’t until I spent my own money was I able to get answers. This re-affirms that court approved counseling is there for the money, not the patient.
    I don’t blame my parent(s) for my offense, but I also don’t interact with them in any way, because all of them refuse to acknowledge any take responsibility for their actions.
    I post this because so many of us have experienced these types of things during our lives. I live with suicidal thoughts everyday, and fully expect to end my life at some point, though I don’t plan it. I am at ease with my decision, whatever it ends up being, mainly because I have used Buddhism to break with my attachments and understand impermanence. I have devoted my entire life to helping others( another symptom of BPD!)
    The registry is now just an inconvenience to me. Yes, It has destroyed opportunities, relationships, and future plans. But I now just accept whatever is or will happen. The one thing I can say is that I have the ability to remove myself from all of this when I feel I am ready to.

    Thx for reading

  34. Steveo

    Just went and got my annual Texas drivers license. They make registrants get them once a year in person. My visit to the sheriff’s office for my registration in march which will mark my 25th year since my conviction and 27th year since my offence. It still feels just as oppressive, still unjust, shameful, painful, and like a second-class citizenship where my own country hates me and wishes I would die. I remember back when I was in group, and one guy committed suicide, and one of the probation officers joked that it was a “successful completion of probation” , and the other POs laughed. That was my treatment service provider that reported that to us, and he was really pissed off about it.

    The thing is that God sees this stuff. God knows what these people have done, and are continuing to do. That is why we leave vengeance to Him. We can have peace knowing that one day he will judge all of this. Hopefully I won’t face the rest of my life in this situation, but if I do, I know He will see me through.

    • someone who cares

      SteveO ~ That is such a horrible thing to say. Probation Officers are supposed to help and guide, and you think they have some college degree and a little bit more sense and knowledge. After 27 years, you are not the enemy. You are not a threat. Why do these people have to play dumb and think you still deserve to go through all this? Why can’t people educate themselves rather than being the parrots that they are? Just to think that somebody has to register after all this time is complete and utter BS. We all know this, and I want to think they do, too, but they are too dumb to admit it. Angry!

      • Will Allen

        “Play dumb”? They aren’t playing.

        It is beyond stupid to think that someone who has not committed any crime for over a decade needs to be listed on some list. I suppose they try to justify that by saying that the list is working and keeping the person straight. It’s the opposite in reality. People are not committing crimes in SPITE of the Registries.

        Also, as someone who has a prestigious degree, from a prestigious university, that is very competitive and not easy to get, let me just say that degrees don’t change how smart someone is. I’ve seen plenty of people with degrees that aren’t bright and vice versa. So I wouldn’t give (most) university degrees much clout beyond the fact that it took the person some effort to earn it. That’s about it.

    • R M

      When I first got to prison back in 2000, I voluntarily sought mental help from both a psychologist and a psychiatrist. While talking to the psychiatrist, he flat out told me I would never see my son (he was the victim) again. I proved him wrong by going to court (started in prison and continued once released) to get a plan for letter writing, then phone contact,, then supervised visits with a psychiatrist, the supervised visits with my ex-wife, then unsupervised visits, and ending with no supervision and the ability for him to live with me if he wanted to. This took about 9 years ( 2 incarcerated, 7 out).

      My point: People say stupid things and downright hurtful sometimes.

  35. Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

    Kamala Harris, Carceral Feminist Extraordinaire and Self-Proclaimed Sex-Crimes Vigilante! In case you’re on the fence about this former sex crimes prosecutor, take a look at the following excerpts from her career. I will add that she is, in my opinion, un-electable in the U.S. as a social justice warrior whom the Democrats would be very foolish to nominate. These are just a few noteworthy insights into the mind and machinations of Kamala Harris, a current Democratic favorite for President:

    “In 2006, she supported Proposition 83, a California version of a Florida law known as “Jessica’s Law,” that prohibited convicted sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of parks and schools.” ////


    “Bill to ban social networking for sex offenders”

    “San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, who is sponsoring the measure, acknowledged that the proposed law isn’t a fail-safe measure, but said it will offer a deterrent to sex offenders who do not want to return to jail. Harris, who specialized in child sexual assault cases as a courtroom prosecutor, said it will also create more public awareness around the issue and give law enforcement another tool.

    “The carrot is don’t get on these sites, and the stick is we will prosecute you,” said Harris, who is running for state attorney general. “In my experience, these types of predators are a slimy group and they don’t want to go to jail, and what we’re telling them is that if you go online and start chatting with my 12-year-old niece, you’re going to jail.”” ////
    “‘Operation Boo’ Detains Transient Paroled Sex Offenders On Halloween”
    “State Attorney General Kamala Harris is expanding an annual Halloween child safety project by rounding up transient sex offenders and detaining them at multiple round up centers to make sure they don’t come in contact with kids on Halloween.” ////

    The agreement between the Attorney General and online dating providers eHarmony, and Spark Networks (operator of such websites as JDate and ChristianMingle), states that the companies will protect their members through the use of online safety tools, including checking subscribers against national sex offender registries and by providing a rapid abuse reporting system for members.

    Providers will continue their efforts to screen members for safety threats, whether financial or physical, using a number of protective tools, including looking for fake profiles and checking sex offender registries to prevent registered sex offenders from using their fee-based services. Any member who is identified as a registered sex offender will not be allowed to use these services. ////


    “SB 813 Eliminates Statute of Limitations for Rape in California” “The “Justice for Victims Act” is supported by Attorney General Kamala D. Harris, Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey, San Diego County District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeffrey Rosen, California Police Chiefs Association, Crime Victims United of California, End Rape SOL, Peace Officers Research Association of California, as well as many other law enforcement, women’s rights, public safety, labor, victim’s rights and community organizations. ////

    “Why Do Establishment Feminists Hate Sex Workers?” ////

    “The Phony Feminism of Kamala Harris”
    “In October of 2016, just before she faced voters in her Senate bid, Harris spearheaded the arrest of current and former Backpage executives on charges of pimping and conspiracy, under the (ultimately unsuccessful) theory that providing an open online platform for user-generated content made them responsible for any illegal activity committed by users who connected through the site. Federal law explicitly says otherwise—something Harris certainly knew, as she had petitioned Congress a few years earlier to change the law so that she and other prosecutors could target Backpage (and its deep assets) through state criminal justice systems. What’s more, myriad federal courts have affirmed that prosecutions like the one Harris attempted are illegal.” ////

    “13 Trailblazing Facts About Kamala Harris”

    “After graduating with her law degree in 1989, Harris soon passed the bar (though she failed the first time). In 1990, she took a job as a prosecutor with Alameda County in northern California. She specialized in child sex abuse trials and domestic violence cases, using her power as a prosecutor against those who hurt the vulnerable. She told The New York Times in 2016, “When I was prosecuting child molestation cases, I will tell you, I was as close to a vigilante as you can get.” “But Harris didn’t just show up for women and children in the courtroom. She helped develop a program with the San Francisco Department of Public Health to help emergency rooms spot evidence of child sexual abuse, and she co-founded the Coalition to End the Exploitation of Kids. She pushed for legislation to strengthen laws on the sexual exploitation of minors, and she worked to get San Francisco its first safe house for children escaping from sex work. Harris used her influence in creative ways to support those facing abuse—and punish those perpetrating it.”

    • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

      Take-away quotes: “The carrot is don’t get on these sites [meaning Facebook, social media], and the stick is we will prosecute you,” said [Kamala] Harris, who is running for state attorney general. “In my experience, these types of predators are a slimy group and they don’t want to go to jail, and what we’re telling them is that if you go online and start chatting with my 12-year-old niece, you’re going to jail.” /// “When I was prosecuting child molestation cases, I will tell you, I was as close to a vigilante as you can get.” Do read the whole above-piece, though. She pressured all of the dating sites to bar Registrants, too.

  36. troy

    does anyone know how (if poss) to delete your info,on google and bing? I googled myself and my info was there,what I really don’t like it, pics of my family were on there .I suggest you google your name too,to see if your info is on there, I know its a freedom of info world,but certain info should not be on there, thx for your help

    • Name be gone

      You need to find the source of the info( photo, info , article).

      There are companies that for a fee will go through search engines, info companies, etc. and demand they delete your personal info.
      You can do this yourself, but it is time intensive and not always successful.
      The search engines just allow the postings, they waive responsibility for accuracy of content.
      You gotta luv modern technology, for it has caused the end of privacy forever!
      And we, through an insatiable thirst for useless information and the voyeurist tendencies of society, let all this happen.

      • troy

        thx for info,i paid a law firm 200 bucks to remove me out of some but of course not all as they stated I know I cant state the company that has that info passed on to google, but I did email them to take my info off their web site,I don’t know if that’s enuff

  37. mike r

    Interesting minute order from the court.

    “The Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings ECF No.37 is vacated from calendar and submitted on the papers.”

    So apparently I will not be having a hearing for this motion for judgement on the pleadings. Do not know if this is good or bad, I guess we will see.

    • E @ mike r

      Mike, help us understand what the motion for judgment on the pleadings means for your case? The def below is not helping me much… did the state file the motion? Is this just a motion, or is it a cancelation of your trial date?

      (c)Motions for judgment on the pleadings. A party may file a motion for judgment on the pleadings on the basis that no answer has been filed, or that the pleadings disclose that there are no material issues of fact to be resolved and that party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

      • AJ

        The Motion was filed by the Defendant (“Defendant’s Motion for Judgment…”). It’s not a cancellation of his trial, or even of the Motion foe judgment. All it means is it will be decided based on the documents and information before the Court. To me it means the Court doesn’t see anything worthwhile coming out of listening to @mike r and/or the CA AG in court. It probably means the judge sees it as fairly clear-cut and not needing clarification or expansion from either party. It probably bodes poorly for @mike r, as the “default” position is in the State’s favor.

  38. Watch the “watchers”

    Is there a way to find out when local residency enforcement teams are going out and follow them?
    I think it would be a good idea to document their actions by :
    1.Filming from a distance(perfectly legal)
    2.Noting the # of officers used
    3.asking the registrant after the check about the nature of their offense, time in residence, time since offense, etc.
    4.Duration of time by enforcement team at each residence
    We could then bring this information to city counsels, community mtgs. and congressional representatives to show proof of the waste of man hrs, attitude towards the resident, and how law abiding citizens are being harassed by this action.
    I think there are activists among the RSO population that would be willing to volunteer time for this. Maybe go as far as having a legal rep or journalist along in case of our harassment.
    Any input would be welcome

    • Lake County

      To your first question, NO. Compliance checks are done without prior notice. If police gave prior notice, then an out of compliance person that only provided a relatives/friends address where they didn’t actually reside would just show up on that day to prove they lived there. And I suspect no one really cares about the time police spend doing compliance checks. Society believes that we will offend again at the first chance. And, there’s always the chance when they show up at our home that they will find the registrant in violation of some technical rule, so it gives them another chance to lock us up.

      I also suspect most registrants wouldn’t appreciate anyone showing up at their door just after a compliance check. I would consider it an additional invasion of my privacy especially just after I was just stressed out by having the police there.

    • R M

      You can always film law enforcement or citizens (even at their private residence) from a public space. They (LE) or the residents can be asked questions and can ask any questions of you though. Other than going to their door and knocking, do not lurk around or invade their privacy though.

    • RegistrantNotAnOffender

      A good number of sex offenders give a false address when they register I am sad to say.

      • Will Allen

        Pretty sure “$EX offenders” don’t need to Register at all since they are either completely unknown to law enforcement or they are in prison. So no need or obligation to Register.

        But regarding normal citizens who are forced to Register, why would you be sad if they report a false address? I think that’s great. It would be even better if they refused to Register at all and disappeared to a decent country that hates Amerika. At least that would give some big government employees some justification for their pathetic jobs.

  39. mike r

    AJ is exactly right. Just as AJ I suspect the court is just going to cite Tandeske and Juvenile Male and say it is bound. If so then next step is to go the 9th circuit, if not then either to trial or more motions such as a summary judgement that the AG already stated she would file. The real problem is that I am not an attorney and I am a lone wolf with no one else backing me up so the court pretty much believes it can just blow by me and there is not much I can do since like AJ stated, it has precedent and public opinion on its side. What i am really most curious about is how they are going to treat the judicial notice. The AG’s response is the same old it is disputed facts. No way can you consider CDCR recidivism rates as disputed facts. They are scientifically tracked and their methodologies or results are indisputable. Well see I guess.

  40. mike r

    Yep sure enough. Do not know the reasoning yet as I have not received the actual order, but,

    “FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/31/19 RECOMMENDING that 37 Motion for Judgment be Granted and that this case be Closed.”

  41. mike r

    I really love how the politicians are getting hit hard for shit they did 30-40-50 years ago like this Virginia Gov who wore black face next to a kkk member in his medical school year book. He is being called to step down and has people picketing in front of his house and the whole works. Ha, how do you like it MF. LOVE IT….

    So for those interested here is the order on my site now by the MFR attempting to close my case in the lower court.

    • C

      I, too, do the happy dance when these politicians, who sacrifice RCs and their families for personal gain, crash and burn through their own actions.

      While I think the Governor should tell his detractors to pound sand, I also delight in seeing him squirm. Another way to summarize my sentiments: “Hey Northam, stand your ground. Don’t listen to those a-holes. F them. Oh, and F you, too!”

      • RegistrantNotAnOffender

        Nope, if a registrant can be held liable in the public eye for something they did 30 years ago so should he

  42. mike r

    The first question to come to mind is, Did the court commit reversible judicial error in not taking judicial notice, or even mentioning it, in a decision to grant a dispositive motion for judgement on the pleadings when the court was absolutely supplied with the proper documents and there were no technical errors whatsoever in the request? After all, Fed. R. Evid. 201 (c) (2) states in no uncertain terms that the court, “must take judicial notice if a party requests it and the court is supplied with the necessary information?”

    • E

      She mentions it in a footnote and rejects the applicability.

      Still crossing all fingers for you, Mike

  43. mike r

    Thanks E as I did not even notice that as I was so pissed off I just closed it out. Thanks for the wish as well my friend I will not stop here I can tell you that. I uploaded the actual Answer to the Complaint as well. Kind of interesting and good to see how the AH responds to each and every paragraph. Albeit with a, “I do not have knowledge so I deny” crap mostly.

    • E

      Tons of people rooting for you. Most of us have assumed it would be appealed no matter what side won anyway. But don’t give up hope on a lower level win yet. I’d love to see the Circuit Judge overrule Allison, but not holding my breath on that.

  44. mike r

    Here is going to be my response to that BS.

    “As to respect to the Magistrate’s Findings and Recommendations EFC Nos. 46 footnote 1 Plaintiff wishes to remind the Court that under Fed. R. Evid. 201(c)(2) the Court MUST take judicial notice if a party requests it and the court is supplied with the necessary information, at the bare minimum to preserve those adjudicative facts in the record on subsequent proceedings such as appeal. Nowhere in the Fed. R. Evid. does it state that a court can dispense with such requirement because of ANY opinion of the lower court! Nor does the Court cite any authority to do so.”

  45. Give me back my privacy

    Once you have been removed from registry, and if your offense was possession of CP. a non contact, non violent crime, is it possible to petition to be removed from the DNA data base?

    • Lake County

      There is no way to get removed from the DNA register unless it is determined that you were in fact “Not Guilty”. Getting your record cleared does not mean the record of your crime goes away. I’m not sure why you would worry about them having your DNA unless you think you are going to commit another crime. So stay out of trouble!

      • Give me back my privacy

        Besides making a stupid comment about getting in trouble, my goal is to regain a semblance of privacy. Many offenses can have DNA removed after a certain time offense free or upon expungement. To me it is an extension of an invasion of privacy. If they really need a sample ,I would be glad to go in and take a big shit on their desk!

  46. HopingForHope

    Question: Let’s say I am in state A, and after 2 years I fulfill my duty to register and I am off registration. I decide to move to state B. Once I become a resident of state B, am I suddently required to register for whatever length is required based on their statute that is most similar to the one I registed under in state A?
    In other words, could I face, potentially, lifetime registration in the new state even though I finished my obligation in the state where I came from and where I was convicted? I have tried reading statutes, and it gets a little confusing to me because the definitions can differ from one state to another. An “offender” in one state might be a “violent predator” in another, and perhaps subject to stricter requirements. Sounds like this is not an apples to apples kind of thing. Wondering if anyone has been caught up in this, and challenged it. and what the outcome was. Doesn’t seem right that one state can subject you to register for ANOTHER 10 or 20 or 25 years, or even a lifetime, after you have successfully satisfied the requirements of a state where you lived for as many years.

    • Chris f


      Most states word their registration law so that anyone moving to their state that had an offence similar to one registerable then they have to at least register the length of time the new stae requires. The start time of the clock can vary from date of conviction, or release from jail, or the moment they put you on the new state’s list. Depends on the state.

      Certain states like florida and new York will never remove you even if you leave.

      To compound the inequity, federal housing assistance is denied and you are subject to IML based just on being on a registry. So you and someone else did the exact same crime in the same state at the same time. He finishes 10 years on the registry and then is free. You, however, made a business trip to Florida for a week and got stuck on their registry for life. Now you arent eligible for housing assistance and cant travel to half the countries in the world because you have a markes passport.

      Oh…and dont forget to check the laws in every city you drive through across the u.s. every time you do it. They can change every day and be based on either your past offense or being on any registry or both.

      • CR

        @Chris f — “Certain states like florida and new York will never remove you even if you leave.”

        There are 22 states that never remove you from their registry. Texas is one of them.

        “You, however, made a business trip to Florida for a week and got stuck on their registry for life. Now you arent eligible for housing assistance and cant travel to half the countries in the world because you have a markes passport.”

        Have we seen any evidence that simply being listed on a registry in some state, while no longer required to register there, results in the passport mark for people to whom it is otherwise applicable? One of the criteria in the law is that you are required to register in any jurisdiction. Being listed on a registry in another state does not mean you are required to register. The vast majority of states do not require you to continue to register after you leave the state, even if they keep you on the list. (New York and Wisconsin, I believe, do require those who have moved out of state to continue to register with those states.)

        • troy

          CR. I don’t know how it works but my conviction was in 1985 in ny,i moved out of ny in 1999,they (ny) passed a law stating any crime,if your on parole,probation since 1996 and onward,no one ever notified me to register from 1996 to 1999 I moved to nv in 1999 everything was cool to 2007 when Nevada pressed for awa, I was a tier 1 moved to a tier 3 here in 2018,now I’m moving to ny in march /april I spoke to nys dept of justice and explained my situation,(that was like 2 years ago) they told me more than likely I will NOT have to register but I will be speaking to a lawyer in ny

        • NY won’t let go

          @CR New York requires me to register with them and I have not live in the country for almost 3 years now, wasnt even convicted there. Gonna ask them to let me off the registry when I have to send them my next selfie attached with a few documents that basically prove they are keeping me on beyond their jurisdiction.

          To which they will probably tell me again that they cannot remove me from the registry and that I have to continue registering with them or face a felony failure to register when I am not a resident of the country. And tell me to get off I need to sue them and even that will not get me off because Doe v O’Donnell blah blah blah…😂

          @troy they are lying to you. I was told that I would probably not have to register or at most be a tier 1.

          If you go to the hearing the prosecutor will go off the original charge and make you out to be public enemy number 1.

          I found that their original assessment of a tier two was ridiculous as I had been crime free and this was the only thing in my record that happened 6 years prior to moving there.

          The prosecutor person harassed my character witnesses and tried to convince the judge to make me a tier three because he said that me taking a no contest plea originally meant that I would never have remorse for what I had done. Which in my case I took a plea to a “lesser crime” that I didn’t even commit. Still not sure how that works. You take a plea to something that you didn’t do and they want you to admit that you did it?

      • HopingHope

        So, let’s see. I am going to drive for a week around the Northeast on vacation this Spring, travel through 4 states, not spending more than 1 or 2 days in each state but will pass through, conservatively, 50-75 towns and maybe 2 dozen counties along the way. Am I supposed to research each and every one of those jurisdictions before I get there, and hire a lawyer to review them all to make sure I understand the legalese? Pretty unrealistic if you ask me.

        • AJ

          It’s my personal opinion that Lambert v CA would apply. While I don’t believe it’s a reasonable (or successful) defense to try to claim ignorance of a State’s laws, I do believe one could reasonably make a valid defense at any level below the State. After all, AWA applies to jurisdictions (States, Territories, Tribal Lands, etc) and nowhere is there mention of county or municipal laws. As well, State laws apply to the State, and (to my knowledge) make no mention of other subdivisions in the State and possible laws. I also feel that if living in a State that has no local laws (either by state prohibition or just by there not being any), why would the idea of a county or municipal law even come to mind? Of note, AWA mandates a jurisdiction notify a POTR of the requirement to register. (Under the 10th Amendment, a State can ignore this mandate. However, SCOTUS’ ruling in Lambert exceeds the 10th Amendment sidestep.)

          Absent explicit notification of the existence of these other laws, I don’t get how they can be enforced until after notification (i.e., one free pass). Of course once they say, “AJ, you cannot go/be/stay/sleep/work there in this city/county,” I’m on notice for the rest of my registration term….but only in that county/city. That’s what Lambert was all about: the need for active notification of registration laws and requirements.

          Lambert v CA references:

          A question for those living in or near counties and/or municipalities with their own POTR laws: how are these counties and/or cities notifying you of their laws? Does the registering official give you a list? Is there something on your registration paperwork notifying you of the possibility of laws within counties or municipalities?

          In my opinion, Lambert is essential reading for any domestically traveling POTR.

  47. HopingForHope

    AJ- Thank you for sharing this.

  48. Lake County

    New York passes Child Victims Act, allowing child sex abuse survivors to sue their abusers

    The Child Victims Act will allow child victims to seek prosecution against their abuser until the age of 55 in civil cases, a significant increase from the previous limit of age 23. For criminal cases, victims can seek prosecution until they turn 28. The bill also includes a one-year window during which victims of any age or time limit can come forward to prosecute.

  49. Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

    I think it’s important to put our own circumstances into a wider, social context. This article, surprisingly in “Engadget,” by Violet Blue (@violetblue on Twitter), is really terrific. It points out the creepy prudishness that has overtaken the Internet. Critical to this movement has been the tortured redefinitions of language, unquestionable “personal truths,” scientifically untested claims and boundless populist hysteria. “How sex censorship killed the internet we love. Can’t even read it for the articles anymore.”

Leave a Reply

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.  

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *