ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: July 20 – Berkeley [details]

Emotional Support Group Meetings – Los Angeles:  June 22, July 27  [details]

ACSOL Conference June 14/15 in Los Angeles

General News

General Comments February 2019

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

Join the discussion

  1. Always the bad guys

    https://youtu.be/N-TdfoatSQA
    The reaction to this story by YouTubers kind of gives you a clue as to what kind of mtn. we are climbing to gain our rights back.
    The Judge is called a Pedo, the man is a predator, but the “sweet little girls” are innocent victims.
    The guy obviously is not helping our cause and deserves his sentence, but the two juveniles actually went to his residence and accepted money from him!, knowing full well what was being asked of them.
    This judge will probably face a recall like Judge Persky did. And for just doing his job and applying the law. A shame.

  2. Whenwillitend

    Oral arguments were heard today in MA SJC regarding a challenge of the posting of level 2 registrants online. Don’t know the details and the case is impounded.

  3. Matthew

    Hello All,

    Just wanted to thank you all for your information as I was able to get a 311.11(A) expunged (conviction date of Aug 2012). It was through recordgone. If anyone needs assistance with it, please do not hesitate to reach out.

    • NotEasilyOffended

      Which state? Or was it Federal?

    • DLP

      Matthew, so happy to hear that. I thought 311.11 was not able to be expunged. It has been on lists I have seen of offenses that are not eligible. How does one find out if their offense is able to be expunged?

      • someone who cares

        DPL ~ This is what I found: The following sex-offenses are NOT EXPUNGEABLE under current California law:

        Penal Code section 286, subd. (c)
        Penal Code section 288 (all subdivisions)
        Penal Code section 288a, subd. (a)
        Penal Code section 288.5
        Penal Code section 289, subd. (j)
        Penal Code section 261.5, subd. (d) (felony only – a misdemeanor is eligible)
        Penal Code section 311.1
        Penal Code section 311.2
        Penal Code section 311.3
        Penal Code section 311.11

      • Matthew

        Hey buddy,

        Thank you for encouraging words! Expungement has different variables but to get to the point, it depends on the eviction date. If it was prior to 2014, one could still get it expunged. If it was after, one can not. It depends on how the law was written at the time of conviction. There are also other things such as if you completed probation without any issue, paid all fees, have no other open charges. The DA opposed this but the judge sided with my attorney. I wasn’t there for any of it.

        • matthew

          Conviction date not eviction… Too many real estate studying.

        • DLP

          Thank you for the information. Conviction date = 8/2010. So, I’m going to look into this further.

        • matthew

          if you need anything please reach out to me and I will you give you my e-mail on what to expect.

  4. AO

    Check out this story. This is why the majority of people think we’ll just go on to re-offend. I don’t understand the super low bail for the initial assault, let alone being released on yet another low bail while still on previous bail, while committing yet another molestation. This is the type of person that needs constant monitoring. I didn’t think it was justified to have Persky recalled as he followed probation’s recommendation for sentencing, but this judge needs to lose his position.

    http://www.ktvu.com/news/man-accused-of-raping-three-children-in-a-week-was-released-on-bail-twice-by-same-judge?fbclid=IwAR3qKf6gU5VKKLORZ7SlHhIQFK1GCxBTTzY1C6ydJ9CBDMVXJTBt3QDNEhc

  5. RS

    Hey guys, California RC here. Does anyone have information regarding how the new tiered registry will impact those of us with an expunged case? I have 1 attempted lewd acts that was a sting op case from 2003 and it’s been expunged since 20010. I’ve always been puzzled by the idea that expungement doesn’t relive me of registration but I’m hoping the tiered registry may address this. Also, anyone in another state besides California have any input in registry requirements or relief for those with expunged cases?

    • AO @ RS

      At the moment, there’s nothing mentioned in the law regarding this, so nothing. For us, the expungment is currently next to worthless the way the laws are written (though anyone that can get one should as you never know when the laws might stop being stupid and actually use it like they do for every other crime that qualifies to get it).

      • Dram

        ExPostFacto challenges to Senate Bill 384 Calif. Creating the tiered system

        As I understand it my registration status will change from non disclosure of address and yearly reporting to Tier 3 with address exposure and 90 day reporting. Although the law won’t be in effect until 2021, can it be challenged now for Expostfacto?

        If I were to change my listing to transient and if I could not find housing, I would have the rest of my life of once a month reporting to the sheriffs office. This is a life sentence. Any one have any thoughts?

        https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB384

    • Mot

      RS: Who did you use for your expungement and what was the cost? I had the same attempted lewd conduct via a sting in 2000 and service time for it and got out in 2003
      Thanks

      • AO @ Mot

        Unfortunately, you only qualify for the expungement in CA if you did NOT serve a prison term. It doesn’t matter if the offense is the same. If you were sent to prison while the other person was granted probation and served time in county, they’ll be eligible and you will not.

        • New Person

          If your conviction was in CA and you received only probation and successfully complete probation, then you automatically qualify for 1203.4, expungement.

          No judge can deny you this as it is automatic. This is what I discovered when trying to get my 1203.4. The judge in my case hinted to my lawyer that he would deny my 1203.4. But then I had an appellate lawyer tell my lawyer that the judge cannot deny it b/c it’s law that it’s automatic if you successfully complete probation. If they do deny you, then you can appeal it and watch the judge get reprimanded for not knowing the law.

          You could use a lawyer if you wanted, but you don’t have to. You can do it on your own as it’s automatic.

          What isn’t automatic is 17B reduction. Which doesn’t make any sense once you’ve got your case dismissed, then 17B should automatically be declared a misdemeanor. At least that’s how I read it as a layman.

    • Me. D

      Expunged offenses via 1203.4
      Should automatically be excluded from registering under the new tiered registry. Unfortunately it does not appear the authors have put much thought on how it will be addressed in 2021, it’s up for debate. It really should be one of the first things they address before implementation in 2021.

      • AO @ Me. D

        What makes you or others think 1203.4 would remove your from the registry under the new tiered bill? As it is, 1203.4 has specific language tied to it that it doesn’t end your registration duties and I didn’t see anything in the new bill that showed this would be any different in 2021.

  6. mike r

    Man these MOBS are out of frigging control so bad and setting precedents that are just so far from reality this country is going to hell in a hand basket as they say. I love seeing politicians and the elite getting the same treatment as us, but this is scary shit man. First it is the elimination of the statute of limitations for any and all forms of sexual assault that started on that slippery slope as all bad legislation, “to protect the children” crap at first eliminating the statute of limitations for child sexual assault onto any sexual assault. This is completely unjust and wrong, and that was why we had a statute of limitations. How are you going to defend yourself against accusations from 20-30-100 frigging years ago? Better have some powerful friends like Kavanaugh had or you’re thru. Even Cosby with all his wealth and connection fell to the MOB.
    Now it is black face. If you dressed up in black face million years ago you are ostracized and better not even think about holding onto any public office. Like stated, I am all for these people getting their just deserts, but this is insane. Next it’s going to be, “if you played cowboys and Indians” burnt, “what about you dressed like a girl or even as drag queen (my 25 year old kid dressed as a girl on Halloween because it was funny” burnt, he better stay out of public office. So any stereotypical custom or remark you made no matter how log ago your burnt. Next they are going to pass a law and you will not just be burnt, but prosecuted. I bet just about anyone has some kind of dirt that can make them subject to the “MOB” in their past. That is my name for all of them, “MOB” in all caps.
    Man the far left has their way our constitutional republic is gone. And it is the far left and the elitist “MOB” that are the culprit. Hopefully the founders created a doc and system strong enough to handle this, but it is not looking good at this point in time I can tell you that.

  7. AJ

    This story made me chuckle, seeing how the Thin Blue Liars are crying about having their public info (location and activities) posted for all to see and use: “Google probably won’t pull DWI checkpoints from Waze despite NYPD demand” https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/6/18214585/google-dwi-checkpoints-waze-maps-nypd-letter

    Somehow I suspect G00gle will either outright ignore NYPD or in legalese will tell them to go F themselves. Not only is there no expectation of privacy when in public, but public officials have no expectation of privacy when doing their duties. Checkpoints hit both of those right on the head. Sorry, TBLers, Free Speech remains, despite your desires to kill it. Gotta love when the shoe’s on the other foot with those cheats, thieves and liars.

    • Lake County

      So the police are basically asking to silence today’s modern PRESS? Even the local DA’s office could explain to the cops what freedom of speech and freedom of the press means. This is laughable.

      My local news always tells us what day DUI/DWI checkpoints are going to be conducted in the county, but not the exact location. But usually people on Facebook notify everyone the location after they start.

  8. Minor American

    Hi ! I’m trying to reach Janice b or someone to help me with possible law suit in Alabama..I bought a home and before I could repair it and move in a day care opened up nearby preventing me from registering it as my new address. I want to know if a can suit and if I can get some help ? Thanks ! Please email or at least post here ! In response! Thanks again !

    • NotEasilyOffended

      That doesn’t sound fair! (Nothing is fair in regards to SO’s). See this link to reach Janice…..

      https://all4consolaws.org/contact-us/

    • AJ

      @Minor American:
      Are you **sure** (wink, wink) you hadn’t yet moved in? Anytime I’ve bought a home, I’ve “moved in” right after signing the closing docs. Seems to me it became your residence at that moment….though given you’re now posting here, you may already have a FTR for not notifying after closing and “moving in.”

    • Lake County

      There is no way Janice could advise you on this matter. Her license is to practice law in California only. Giving advise to anyone living in another state would be unwise. This is a very specific issue that would require you to contact a lawyer in your state. Perhaps you could see if the ACLU in your state would help. This is not likely an issue that you could get answered here.

      If you are on probation or parole, then you better just do whatever they say unless you have lots of cash for an attorney to fight. Here in CA, residency restrictions were found unconstitutional for those NOT on probation/parole. (Thanks Janice).

      If you want an uneducated opinion from someone who does not know your state laws, I’d guess you may be screwed. If residency location is an issue in your state and you purchased a house after checking out if you were allowed to live there, then I would suggest moving in and registering your address with the police as soon as the purchase is recorded. But then, you must also find out if a residency restriction can be enforced when a school/day care moves in after you are already there.

      You might just consider flipping the house and moving to a more rural area where this will not become an issue. Find a local civil right attorney right away. Good luck.

  9. Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

    “Former teacher pleads guilty to altering social media photos to make child pornography” A reminder that actual kids or actual sex are not required to be sent up Fed River. ///
    https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/former-teacher-pleads-guilty-to-altering-social-media-photos-to/article_84f39b2a-7822-555a-a075-64bc4534be88.html

    • Chris f

      I may be readung it wrong, but the fake images may be just a separate thing he admited to and not part of the real charges. It says “He also admitted to downloading pictures of children from Facebook and digitally altering the photographs to depict himself sexually assaulting and physically harming the children.”

      It said that after the part of what he plead guilty to.

      If the images in question didnt depict real kids, then he should be covered by Ashcroft v free speech coalition.

      However, that is a gray area if he puts real kids faces on fake bodies doing sexual acts and shares them. That could end up being an actual traumatic event if those pictures end up with anyome that child knows and should probably fall under some law.

      • Will Allen

        I’m no authority by any stretch and I’ve never tried to figure it out but … I’m fairly sure that I have read articles saying that you can be convicted of CP with self-drawn cartoons or written erotica. I am fairly sure the articles supplemented their information with real world convictions. Seems crazy, but I believe that is accurate.

        • C

          I recently read an article about a guy convicted of making CP from multiple, otherwise legal, images. Now, the end result depicted the douche bag violating minors. Still, I’m imagining two pictures torn from a magazine sitting on a table. Separate they are perfectly legal, socially acceptable pictures of whatever. Slide them together in just the right way, however, and -wammo – you just committed a felony facing a mandatory 5 years in the joint and a lifetime of public shame and humiliation.

          So many books about dystopian world’s, but we’re living in one right effing now.

      • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

        “That could end up being an actual traumatic event if those pictures end up with anyome that child knows and should probably fall under some law.” I think that you’re making some scientifically unsubstantiated assertions about the mechanism of trauma, Chris.

        • Chris f

          Are you saying there wouldn’t be a negative impact to a 3rd grade girl who’s male classmates start showing everyone an image that appears to be her face on a nude or being abused body that is difficult or impossible to know is fake by her peers?

          Sorry…but I’ve know kids to commit suicide for far less embarrasment.

        • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

          Chris, we can all come up with hypothetical horror stories to justify kneejerk laws. What trauma is, what causes it, its enduring or transient effects should not be informed primarily by what we imagine or pull out of our hat. Since you’re advocating for a law then you are making an assumption about harm and who should be in prison. In this case, you’re advocating for laws that proscribe cutting-and-pasting images together that will put anyone doing such pasting in prison. I think that the burden should be on you or anyone advocating for such laws to demonstrate harm. Your hypothetical, from what I can tell, has not actually happened except perhaps in a case where a school kid may have done the cutting-and-pasting him-or-herself. Yes, kids get embarrassed, their feelings hurt, and their egos bruised all of the time. That’s a reason for imbuing them with strength and independence to inoculate them to these insults, not subjecting all human interactions to the scrutiny and regulation of authorities. The funny thing about the movement to treat children as ever-more fragile is that it seems to have made children who are more fragile and easily damaged. Higher suicide rates certainly attest to that.

        • Chris f

          David. I have no doubt most people draw the line in different places as to what should be acceptable and legal. I am a big fan of anything in my house that doesnt affect or hurt anyone else is none of the government’s business. I am a big fan of artistic freedom too. Once someone starts using real pictures of kids manipulated into realistic looking sexual situations AND shares or trades them around in public and…well…that’s about where I would have to agree with those that artistic freedom has gone too far. To each his own.

  10. Chris f

    Proposed Texas law:

    https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=86R&Bill=HB1433

    Creates both residency and PRESENCE restrictions for registrants.

    Total idiotic garbage. They want signs posted on roads where the child safety zones exist. Then, if you are a registrant, you can only go into them with a legitimate reason. What??

    So how do they even do that? Are they planning in having police that auto scan license plates flag regristrant cars? Since registrants register every car they may ever drive, that means family member cars getting pulled over. That means a registrant on his way to or from work driving past a daycare could get pulled over every day and interrogated! Or even his wife.

    Wow….total stupidity.

    • Will Allen

      “Total idiotic garbage.”

      LOL, perfect summary. You could’ve appended ” only supported by un-American, scumbag dumbf*cks.”

      Who are the “people” who support such things? We need to attack them and run them out of our country.

      Your statements about the vehicles is obviously true. I have always Registered many vehicles. When my kids were younger, I thought it was great to have their cars Registered. To keep them in line, LOL. I told them they had to be extra careful because the law enforcement criminals (LECs) would be wanting to harass them ALL of them time, try to frame them for drunk driving, plant drugs in their cars, etc., etc. etc. Good benefit and I do think it did some good. Kept the kids in line and taught them to hate and mistrust LECs. Now they teach their children.

      I also enjoyed that the LECs did (and do) use automatic license plate scanners and then wasted time looking around for who was driving a certain vehicle, what they were doing, etc. Nothing I enjoy more than wasting the time and other resources of LECs. They occasionally tried to ask me why certain cars were wherever. Which I found to be just hilarious and enjoyable. Of course I’d try to waste as much of their time as possible and never answer them.

      If I was ever going to be doing anything illegal, I certainly wouldn’t be using any vehicle that could be tracked to me. So funny. People who support the Registries are just stupid.

  11. Crossing fingers

    Convicted 01/2015 of 311.1 possession in Santa Clara Co.
    the statute says no expungement, but is that absolute , or is that something that could be a discretionary by the presiding judge.
    I ask because a client is a respected defense attorney (unfortunately didn’t meet until after my conviction) that knows many judges and is friends with D.A.
    I would like to approach him about my “situation”. We have touched in a round about way on the subject of the registry in previous discussions, and he is extremely sympathetic to the cause, feeling that the whole system is a trap ( his words). When the time is right, like after tiered system is put into effect, I would like to approach him. Nervous that it could harm the relationship, but feel I have to take that chance. Nothing ventured, nothing gained I guess. Any input appreciated.

    • matthew

      As I understood it, anything after 2014 is not allowed to be expunged. I hope I am incorrect.

    • Wondering

      Did they charge you with 311.11 as a M or F?

      • Crossing fingers

        A felony. All cp offenses in Santa Clara Co. are treated as felonies as I understand it. But reduced to misdomeanor, which tells me that the courts recognize this particular offense as a minor when balanced against other offenses committed.
        With a tier system on the horizon, my argument would be, why not allow expungement upon removal from registry.

  12. Mike G

    I heard Janice on the radio (KNX 1070) several times this evening.

    I think it good that the public gets a chance to hear about the challenges we constantly face.

    • norman

      I wish Janice would let us know when she does these programs. Sure would have like to of heard it..

  13. R M

    For those convicted in Nebraska looking for a pardon, looking to challenge sex offender laws, etc, I saw this video:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5UWRd4fM_w

    This lawyer seems to be willing to help. I do not know him, I do not know if he’s good or just looking for clients… just passing along the info. There are links in the video’s description to contact him.

  14. Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

    I just got what I can only assume is another scam call, this time from someone claiming to be with the San Francisco “sex offender unit.” He said that I had failed to give a DNA sample. I don’t know where the scam part of it comes in since I didn’t let him get that far. I told him that I had given a blood sample back in 1993 and that I wasn’t going to give them another one. He said that there was a new “federal law” that required that I have another one so that they could put it in their database. I said that I was already in the CODIS database. I asked for his name and phone number and told him I would call him back after I reached the sex offender unit to confirm his identity. While they did not answer the phone, the overall investigations department confirmed that there is no one with his name in the sex offender unit or, for that matter, elsewhere in the department.

    • Lake County

      In the last 20 years I’ve registered in CA, any new registration requirements are always brought up at the next registration appointment. No one has ever contacted me saying I needed to come in again for any new requirement.

      • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

        Nor have I ever been contacted by them in all of the years I’ve been registering. S.F. pretty much just leaves me alone. This is the second registry-scam call I’ve gotten, the first one was from someone who thought that I lived in Alameda County. That was a real giveaway. This second one had me biting for about ten seconds or so until he insisted that there was a new federal law requiring me to submit my DNA. It’s hardly new. I can’t imagine that this approach is going to work very well for them since, as far as I know, anyone on the Registry has already “given” a DNA sample.

    • someone who cares

      Notorious, did you google the number? It usually tells you if it is a Scam Caller.

      • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

        Thanks, I tried that and it didn’t produce anything. It’s become extremely easy for phone scammers to spoof local phone numbers and avoid identification, including by law enforcement which is why scam calls have gone through the roof.

  15. Larry

    Registration is Servitude!
    SORNA forces me to be on-call around a 48 hour clock to deliver public safety data, under oath, as needed, for publication on a website that is scraped by private enterprise for redistribution and profit making purposes. See e.g. homefacts.com.
    SORNA thus transforms me into a delivery boy, expert witness and assistant website content manager. The value of this conscripted service exceeds 200k per year as the approximate cost to government of acquiring the data it wants by alternate means.
    Article 1 Section 10 prohibits congress and state legislatures from singling people out for deprivations of liberty. That’s a bill of attainder. Cummings v. Missouri. The 13th Amendment prohibits Servitude except as punishment for crime of which the citizen has been duly convicted. That’s a judicial function.
    Hence, Congress can’t lawfully seize, extort, convict or impose servitude against a subclass whether civil or not. All the mumbo jumbo concerning such vagaries as delegation of power and retroactivity are nothing but a red herring.
    SORNA is forced labor, involuntary servitude, and human trafficking. Because those are felony crimes, any proponent of SORNA should be indicted for crimes against humanity.

    • AO

      The 13th amendment doesn’t apply because SCOTUS deemed the registry non-punitive (not a punishment). Most of what they’re able to do is directly because of this ruling.

      • New Person

        @AO,

        You missed his point.

        Punishment is legal servitude. What the registry is doing is “forcing” registrants to go to the local PD, take an hour or more of their time to fill out paperwork under penalty of law, and not get paid by being forced into such a “duty”. Megan’s Law even states it’s a “duty to registry”.

        Legal forms of servitude:
        1) Punish for a crime
        2) Jury Duty. (Applied to everyone and you get paid.)
        3) Military Service. (Applied to everyone and you get paid.)
        4) Tax Reporting. (Applied to everyone and you mail in your reportings… like the 2003 Smith v Doe case of reporting done via mail, not in person)
        5) Road Work. (Applied to only those under custody.)

        Since the registry isn’t punishment, then options 1 and 5 cannot hold true for registrants. Options 2, 3, and 4 are applied to everyone. Options 2 and 3, you are paid for your service. Option 4 does not require your presence for reporting.

        The only way one gets into this “duty to registry” is through a conviction. The only examples of legal servitude for a conviction are options 1 and 5. Again, the registry isn’t punishment. So option 1 cannot hold true. If you are no longer under custody, then option 5 is also not true, which is also a part of punishment.

        I’ve discovered that if you don’t make the argument simple that the AG will try to run circles around you and the judge will believe it. So a simple list of what is legal servitude and contrast that with the registry might make it easier to reveal that the state is “forcing service out of a free person”. And the registry should be considered punishment as you are not paid for your “forced service to register” like military service and jury duty. Forced service without payment is considered punishment and is only legible if and only if to punish a crime, which is like probation or parole terms to register monthly or more as well as subject to home checks (compliance or free search).

        So trying to make the involuntary servitude argument is difficult b/c it’s very complex and can be bogged down by the opposition. It has to be made so simple that a judge can see the simplicity of the comparison and contrast. There is no difference in the act of being forced to register with the local pd as a free person or registering with the probation/parole dept (could be the local pd as well). Both are forced to do in-person registration under penalty of law. Probation/parole is punishment.

  16. Carl

    Hey all, I am in pa and wondering if anyone has received a letter yet from the PSP about an updated registration date? I was covered the Act 10 changes last year. I did receive the letter advising me of this and did my required registration in March of 2018. The letter then stated I would be advised this year by mail of my new required annual registration date. I am just wondering if anyone else in PA has received a letter yet?
    I am planning on going and registering again in March prior to the one year mark to cover my nether region if I doing get the letter. I will not call the PSP because I can almost guarantee I would end up arrested! 😀

  17. Shawn

    Has anyone watched this video? https://youtu.be/KDeS-TafF50

    Apparently this fellow has fled to Europe seeking political asylum from the registry. Any thoughts? I’m sort of curiose to see if it will be granted.

  18. ReadyToFight

    Seems to me that most of this mess could be cleaned up virtually overnight by slapping a Gavel down and mandating Registration as a Probationary tool only. What the hell is the point of serving time, paying fines, spending years under supervision only to be released into society never to have a clear path to redemption or leading a productive life, but rather constantly having the threat of imprisonment looming over our heads while we struggle to find jobs/ a place to live/ food/ meaningful relationships….it’s almost like they WANT us to be the Monsters they portray us All to be.
    Living under a bridge sharpening our teeth.

    • Chris f

      You are exactly correct and I am not sure how a proper legal challenge saying exactly that hasnt been made.

      I cant link it right now because I am on my phone, but legislature even made it law that a judges job is to punish, rehabilitate, and protect the public and all that must be tailored to the individual, crime and circumstances. In regards to crimes, legislature is only supposed to provide guidance and tools to the judiciary.

      This should be a separation of powers constitional challenge. As pointed out in that new amicus brief by the AG in another posting on here, registration interferes with the judiciary. Prosecutors have to allow some to plee to lesser non registerable charges to avoid a trial damaging the victim. Judges have been known to lessen punishments because they take into account mandatory registration. Some countries wont extradite people to the US because our laws are inhumane. All towns create different restrictions and change them daily instead of a judge setting the resteictions one time and taylored during sentencing.

      All of that could be avoided in a nation of ordered liberty if the judiciary were put back in control of punishment and protecting the public.

  19. matthew

    The White House

    Verified account

    Official Tweet from the White House:
    @WhiteHouse
    Follow Follow @WhiteHouse
    More
    Preventing sex offenders and violent gang members from entering this country is all in a day’s work for @CBP.

    Just this week, law enforcement agents apprehended two convicted child molesters and an MS-13 member near unprotected parts of our border.

    Aren’t we glad the White House puts sex offenders with gang members?

  20. mike r

    For anyone interested here is the transcript of Conn v Dept of Safety. Interesting read to say the least.
    https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2002/01-1231.pdf

  21. Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

    “Why giving polygraph tests to sex offenders is a terrible idea” /// Because they’re easy to beat. An old article but still relevant. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/aug/10/polygraph-lie-detector-tests-sex-offenders

    • Will Allen

      Do people even need to try to beat them? People with sense know polygraphs don’t work so who cares what the results are?

      I’ve had “deception” on a good number of polygraph exams when I’ve not deceived in the slightest. I even had trouble “passing” a polygraph that I hired to help me. The polygrapher knew the whole point was to get me to pass and she, my attorney, and I even worked out all of the questions in advance to get what I needed.

      Polygraphs are a terrible idea because:

      1. They are junk that distracts from doing something useful.

      2. They waste time, money, and other limited resources (see #1 again).

      3. They are adversarial. I don’t know about other people but I’m not going to work with anyone who calls me a liar. Just not going to. So that makes “therapy” fairly useless.

      • R M

        @Will: “People with sense know polygraphs don’t work so who cares what the results are?”

        PO’s may not be able to charge a crime as a failure of a polygraph, but definitely will use it to alter/increase restrictions.

    • Chris f

      I can vouch for this first hand.

      Those tests get honest people in trouble and those that wish to lie and know how they work will get a great score. Totally bogus and outright dangerouse to rely on those.

      Even worse is the probation officers that only allow someone to pick from 2 or 3 of their “approved” polygraphers. Those polygraphers know they have to manipulate the test do get the results the po wants or they will lose that business. There was a lawsuit back in 2008 in Texas due to that brought by the other dozen polygraphers that were not on one probation offices short list. The outcome was that a probationer can choose from any licensed polygraphers. That ruling was forgotten about and things went back the way they were though.

      • No issues

        I had no issues with my polygraph session. The doctor that issued it asked my general background questions then applied the test. As with every other person at every other stage of this fiasco, he commented that my results were expected. No issues. It still amazes me that the system that demands you take therapy, polygraphs, registration, etc. , ignores the recommendations that the very experts they employ give.

        • RegistrantNotAnOffender

          In Washington you don’t have to pay cor them but the DOC has an inhouse polygrapher.

  22. Mot

    Question I hope someone can help me with :
    What is the difference in the area of Tiers and Expungement etc. for 288(a) versus 664/288(a)?

    Thanks

    • matthew

      I think that is the million dollar question.
      It is not stated in the law and at this point it would be a guess.

  23. DD

    Just a thought, What do you guys think about taking up a collection to hire a very competent lawyer that can possibly get us a ruling that once your off a registry and served your registry time, no other obligations will ever apply to you in any US state or territory. I understand this is more appealing to Rc’s like myself that are no longer required to register, but in the end I think it could be everyone’s way off, by moving to a non-sorna compliant state, petition court for removal if you have completed the required time, then we would be legally freed of our obligations. I think this may work as we are technically asking the court to not punish us again after court ordered relief rather than just just seeking to let people off. What do you guys think 500 people at 100 a piece for a chance to regain some freedom?

    • Lake County

      I think that would require a change of laws in all 50 states. The feds don’t have control of the states on these issues. SORNA laws are not mandatory on States. States voluntarily comply to these laws. Your suggestion would require legislative changes in every State. It would cost millions just to advocate for these changes. Federal changes will only happen when parts of a law are found unconstitutional.

      • DD

        My thoughts were that if the decision was made by a federal judge that decided re-registering a defendant who was removed from registry unconstitutional, then it would apply to every state and territory nationwide? I believe they cannot force guidelines for states to follow, but my thinking would be that a federal judge can overturn individual state laws that violates the US constitution. Is this correct? If so it may be a good possibility. It’s a better chance than just saying the entire registry is unconstitutional, which we all agree it is, but will way more difficult to ever get a federal judge to agree with.

      • DD

        This would be an entirely new reasonable legal approach that a judge may actually buy. If a judge were to agree, we would have to move to a state with less stringent ways off the registry to get off. I’m not trying to evade the registration system, just thinking of a legal way to give registrants a chance to get somewhat of a normal life back.

        • Will Allen

          You are not trying to evade “the registration system”? I’ll be blunt and honest and say that if it were not risky to not Register, I definitely would not do it. The Registries deserve nothing but contempt and disrespect. They are not legitimate law by legitimate government. They are an ongoing act of war by criminal regimes. Remember that these criminal regimes attract a certain type of person into them and most of them are not decent people.

          I have made the criminal regimes pay though and that won’t stop. I will keep every option open.

  24. KN

    I contacted a couple attorneys today to try to get my felony reduced to misdemeanor, and to expunge my records. I have a felony conviction of 311.11a (possession of child porn). I was convicted march of 2010. Never had so much as a speeding ticket before or after this conviction. My question is: has anyone else had success in reducing their felony? And also, after reading an article here about a person who recently used the public defenders office to get his COR, I am thinking about contacting them instead of paying big $$$ for something that may not be able to happen. Any words of wisdom?

    • Go for it

      I wouldn’t say it’s a crap shoot, but it is different with each case, as well as the judge hearing case.
      Some have gotten reduction immediately after probation, and some have been told to wait. Since it has been 8 yrs for you and your conviction was before 2014, I don’t foresee any issues. You can also request an expungement as well.
      On a side note, isn’t it funny how we are all grouped together for the purpose of punishment and public humiliation, but when we apply for things like this all of the sudden each case is different.

  25. steve

    Another win in Alabama of all places! I especially love the Judge at the end saying “sex offenders are not second class citizens”.
    Some great quotes for Mike R in here.

    https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/alabama/almdce/2:2011cv01027/46936/283/

  26. Chis f

    While a shame the man had to be called out on his sex offender status in the article, at least they didn’t put it in the title of the article. I am surprised.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/foodanddrink/foodnews/man-sues-burger-king-for-revoked-free-food-for-life-promise-made-after-bathroom-mishap-updated/ar-BBRM5sZ?li=BBnbfcL

    • RegistrantNotAnOffender

      its completely irrelevant and poor journalism. Love how someone called them out on the main article.

      https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2019/01/burger-king-broke-its-promise-of-free-meals-for-life-to-portland-area-customer-lawsuit-claims.html

      “The last paragraph should never have been printed. It has no bearing on the rest of the story and serves no purpose other than to humiliate and embarrass the man for something that happened a quarter century ago. Shame on the Oregonian for such poor judgment.”

      This is the same place that drug heimlech a college pitcher who had a sex offense at 14 thru the mud

      • AJ

        Following the lead, I sent this to the writer (I cannot bring myself to call her a journalist):
        *****
        I read with some humor your story of the gentleman trapped in a Burger King restroom and his suit. However, I fail to understand the relevance or importance of the last paragraph where you mention his previous conviction for some sort of sex offense.

        Do you make a habit of including criminal histories in all your stories, even when there is no nexus to the story itself? Is his case now frivolous because he has a criminal record? Or perhaps because it’s specifically a sex offense? I don’t get it. To me it was nothing but a salacious add-on that neither made sense nor contributed to the story. In my opinion, the journalistic value of the story would go up were the last paragraph removed.

        Thank you.
        *****

  27. Steveo

    We should be clear that any path forward that doesn’t include redemption, or some form of restoration for the perpetrator is simply revenge. A public listing of past crimes, with living, and travel restrictions, notifications and red-flags is not restoration. It’s revenge, it’s punishment, and it not only needs to be stopped, if true justice were done, there will be reparations.

  28. Steveo

    We should be clear that any path forward that our government takes that doesn’t include redemption, or some form of restoration for the perpetrator is simply revenge. A public listing of past crimes, with living, and travel restrictions, notifications and red-flags is not restoration. It’s revenge, it’s punishment, and it not only needs to be stopped, if true justice were done, there will be reparations for those who’ve had these things put on them Ex post facto.

  29. Steveo

    There is a doctrine within Christianity called “Substitutionary Atonement”. That is that Christ died in the place of sinners who put their faith in Him. The same kind of Substitutionary Atonement is applied by zealots to registered citizens. Where we who have committed sexual crimes in our past, particularly those against children and have been caught are to bear the shame, and the punishment for them. We are their scapegoats for their own past or present thoughts, and sometimes their actions that they themselves were never caught for but they feel soooo guilty for. These are the zealots that push for the laws, and a never ending ever tightening noose around our necks. There are only two types of people that make up the zealots, those who have been victims themselves who are looking for revenge, and those who are looking for a substitute to bear the guilt and penalty of their own sins so they can go on being the “good people” that everyone thinks they are, and that they want to think they are. They want to silence the guilt in their own ears by putting you and me on the cross in their place. We are the sacrifices to atone for their own evil. We bear the curse to death, and they get to live.

    • To add to this

      Time and time again, people in positions of power or influence advocate for the criminalization of the very acts they perform with vertical impunity. I refer you to Adam Walsh, or various public officials that travel to foreign countries for sexual encounters with minors, gay congressmen that can’t accept their own sexuality so they push discriminatory laws against lgbt communities. How about religious leaders abusing their positions of trust.
      What we need is a Charles Bronson style of justice. Someone to rid our society of these creeps!

  30. E

    Would like to know about those out there in Bay Area and beyond that are single. Would like to discuss the unique challenges that we as singles face. Things like:
    1 living alone, or with others
    2 How your offense impacts roommates
    3 meeting others, dating
    4 effects of registry on relationships
    5 dealing with loneliness, solitude, rejection
    If others are interested, leave a comment. Many of us have no support system to provide us a safety net when we are close to the edge. This could be a way to interact with others that care, understand, and possibly provide assistance.

    I know that listening to and helping others has gotten me out of my dark place many times.

    Look forward to constructive thoughts and comments

    • NPS

      I live in the Bay Area, and I am single. My situation differs from most people on the registry. I’m not on the published site. I’m also a woman, which also bring a set of unique issues that I don’t believe men face.

      I’ll answer each of your points as listed

      1. I’ve had roommates and they never knew my status. Honestly, I just don’t like living with people even before the RC status. I own my own house and still live alone By personal preference.

      2. Same as above

      3. All of my friends know about my status. They have been very supportive since I disclosed it. They’re surprised that I was even charged with an offense and didn’t even know it was illegal and/or registerable. Regardless they see me for me.

      4. Relationships have been tough. They start out supportive but eventually use the registry against me once I end the relationship. This happened only twice. The first one called my job and disclosed. I was forced to resign. He then took photocopies of a personal photo and wrote on them about my status. He put them on my neighbors’ car windshields. I reported it to SFPD but they just took the report. It was illegal what he did because only law enforcement can disclose and I’m a non-disclosure RC. We had mutual friends. They ended up rejecting him and no longer talk to him. They’re still friends with me. The second person sent an email to people I know and work with. They were more upset at him and didn’t care about my past. Again very supportive. I ended up leaving the job 6 months later on good terms because I changed careers.

      5. I do have my moments of despair but I count my blessings. I still have the support of my family and friends both pre and post conviction and they are always there for me. I also have a dog, which helps a lot. I’m also part of a social community in the Bay Area. Some know about my status and don’t care about it. Most are unaware.

      Other issues.
      As a woman on the registry, I find that I have been a target of sexual harassment/assault more frequently. Yes I am an attractive woman, and I do have a friendly demeanor and charm. I maintain this because I don’t want anyone seeing me as just my status. But once I reveal my status (because I thought they gained my trust) they get more sexually aggressive as if I somehow deserve the treatment because of my status and that I have no room to complain because they believe my status means that I am not credible. Sort of ironic that my status creates predatory behavior in non-RCs.

      One thing I’ve learned, though, is that it’s not me who has the problem. It’s everyone else. I was fired from my job when my tyrant of a boss learned of my status. It was a convenient excuse for her to rid me (though illegal). She had forced at least 15 people to resign during my tenure because she didn’t like them. She does this so she won’t pay unemployment. When I refused to resign, she fired me because of my status thinking she wouldn’t have to pay unemployment. Well, she still had to pay it to me.

      I’ve had falling outs with people, of course, but it wasn’t due to my status. And they never used my status against me. At least they had some integrity and the character to not smear my name. If a person were to do that, it says more about their foul character.

      I hope my words have been of some encouragement.

      • E

        Amazing comment! Thank you.
        I lost everything upon my conviction. Invested in property overseas. Relatives use it now.
        Had relationship with a fantastic person, but she passed from cancer. Lost occupation due to state licensing regulations.

        Was intent even before my arrest on leaving the U.S. and the country I was going to live caused many questions after my conviction and both relatives and others I knew deserted me.
        The most common response to my relationship and subsequent move was, “Why cant you find someone here?”

        My dog is literally my lifeline now. Without her, almost certain I would have rowed out to sea and dropped an anchor with me attached.

        I have had only one incident with rental. It was with another Renter that was deflecting her dealings by telling everyone about me. She has since been arrested on drug charges (for a 6th time!) and is no longer here.
        I volunteer for trail maintenance in open spaces, and that gives me a purpose in something I care about. I tried some actual humanitarian volunteer work, but seeing so many people that have freedoms and are squandering them just upset me, so I stopped.

        I am too reserved to often get involved in groups. It’s partly my personality and partly a childhood that created a high degree of mistrust in people. An evening walk with my dog and a cup of tea just feels safer. I have entered a few marathons and bike races, but find myself leaving as soon as I finish.

        My offense was reduced to misdomeanor, but with the registry, it makes no difference. What the legal system considers a minor offense has had a major impact on my emotional, social and financial well-being.

        I thank you for sharing. I hope more will. The cliche’ that we have more in common than what differentiates us is never more true than in the context of the registry.

        Regards,

  31. C

    I’ve been able to remove myself from several web sites including whitepages.com, spokeo and several others.
    Does anyone know how to remove oneself from HomeFacts.com, offenderradar.com, instantcheckmate.com and any others? Until recently, when you googled my name you got my LinkedIn, FB and other socials which is exactly how I want it. Now the first three links are the three sites I just mentioned and I am wondering if my wife’s constant searches aren’t pushing these results to the top??? Thanks!

    • e (formerly E)

      Somebody else’s has started posting as E, so I guess I’ll change to e.

      Never click on undesirable links FROM a Google search. That trains Google that that result is more important than the other ones it was prioritizing before. If you want to look at those sites go directly to the site via its URL.

    • Chris f

      Yes, clicking in links in a search brings them more to the top.

      Try this though. Use google chrome incognito mode to search for yourself (still dont click on what it finds other than good stuff). This way google isnt influencing the results by your location, cookies, or history and it will be a search more equal to a random person searching for you.

      • AJ

        I’m skeptical Incognito mode would do the trick. It’s only incognito on the client side; on the server side, Google is still doing the redirect and tallying the click-thru. I wouldn’t even trust DuckDuckGo. As @e suggested is the only way to avoid influencing results searches.

    • AJ

      @C:
      Someone on here recently posted a link to help with this. Since I cannot recall who posted it, I cannot give deserved props for it, but here’s the link the the PDF that can help: https://inteltechniques.com/data/workbook.pdf

      There are a LOT of sites out there to whack-a-mole. Some are quite easy, some quite less so. The bottom of PDF-page 5 lists the heavy hitters to focus on first, as apparently their info trickles down to others. I don’t think a head-on attack on h0mef@acts or the like will work unless off registries everywhere. Gotta undermine their data pipe instead. (Funny side note: Inst@ntch3ckm@te has some of my data intertwined with some other people with my same name and middle initial. I’ll gladly take that camouflage.)

      On a side note, if you haven’t frozen your credit reports yet, I highly recommend doing so. It’s not that tough to do, and they can be temporarily unfrozen when and as needed with a few clicks and boxes filled. As of late 2018, it’s free to do, too (it used to cost $10 each way). I’ve had mine frozen for quite some time and have also thawed them now and then for credit apps. Works well, and I have peace of mind.

  32. mike r

    Look at this people. Has anyone ever seen a statutes purpose statement like this with absolutely no statistics, facts, empirical evidence, studies, etc. as CA 290? Just nothing but unfounded assertions of universally untrue statements.
    https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2011/pen/part-1/290-294/290.03/

    • Facts should matter

      “While the Legislature is aware of the possibility of misuse, it finds that the dangers to the public of nondisclosure far outweigh the risk of possible misuse of the information.”

      Translation: We’re expendable!

      Just reading everything on that link made me puke.

      People do not want – and shouldn’t – be held morally responsible for the actions of the very worst fraction of their ‘group’.

    • AO

      (7) The Legislature also declares, however, that in making information available about certain sex offenders to the public, it does not intend that the information be used to inflict retribution or additional punishment on any person convicted of a sex offense. While the Legislature is aware of the possibility of misuse, it finds that the dangers to the public of nondisclosure far outweigh the risk of possible misuse of the information. The Legislature is further aware of studies in Oregon and Washington indicating that community notification laws and public release of similar information in those states have resulted in little criminal misuse of the information and that the enhancement to public safety has been significant.
      _______________________________________________________________________________________

      I’d love to see all the data this paragraph is based on, especially “the enhancement to public safety has been significant”.

  33. America's Most Hated

    I feel like crying right now. I got my passport revocation notice a month ago and paid my $170 to get a new one. I filled out my form from the post office and paid to expedite the delivery. After waiting for four weeks at home and not working (I work contractually out of town), they sent me a letter saying that my passport application had been denied and they are keeping my $170. They denied my passport on the basis that since the passport I returned to them had been revoked, it could no longer be used as evidence of my US citizenship and I have to go IN PERSON to a passport center which is not close to here. They KNOW who I am. I have had a passport since I was 9. For years I had a red Official government passport along with a top secret clearance. But now, the passport that THEY, the government, issued to me is no longer evidence of my citizenship? They are just jerking me around until I put a noose around my neck and then they will all laugh about it. I can’t believe that there’s no lawyer in this entire country that can file any sort of tort against the government for harassment and violation of the 14th Amendment. I am supposed to return to work tomorrow, but I can’t now because I have to go apply for a birth certificate and drive to the passport office in another state to personally apply for a passport that says I molested children, which I didn’t. I clicked on nude Russian 16 year old girls posing naked 16 YEARS ago and now my life is crap and always will be. I lost the love of my life and my career and am lucky to not be living under a bridge or dead, but all I have left is travel and the government is doing everything they can to even let me have that. I feel like crying.

    • AJ

      @AMH:
      I’m sorry to hear of the bureaucratic BS they tossed on you. It seems odd they deny and keep $ for having what was essentially incomplete/incorrect proof of citizenship. (It’s also odd that plenty of others have been able to get replacements using the revoked “invalid” document.) If your State is fully compliant with REAL ID, perhaps your DL can suffice as proof? It would make sense, given one cannot get a compliant DL/ID without the exact same paperwork State wants for PP issuance. Maybe call the PP office and ask about that. It may behoove you to call State and talk with someone regarding it. The muckety-mucks in D.C. will be PITAs to deal with, but you’re more likely to get better answers…once you get them. (Since you once held a red passport, you know that game well enough.)

      They definitely did a screw job on you with how they handled your re-app. Please don’t let it get you down. Instead let it steel your resolve to overcome their attempts to hold you down. Hope and stubbornness are our best traits, IMO.

    • Mike G

      @AMH

      I am so sorry! That is such BS that it really burns me up! And then to keep your money to cover all their “trouble” to have to inform you… It’s like they just look for ways to screw us over! With that conviction (which was bogus to start with), you never should have been registered or subject to IML!

      At least we all learned something. I almost did the same thing a year ago when my passport was revoked, but instead of applying right away, I decided to hold off for a while, and I just sent my passport (and passport card) back to them. I finally went in person with my birth certificate, and I got my “marked” passport a couple of weeks ago. The next fun will be seeing if it gets me into Munich and Naples for my next trip in April.

      Maybe ACSOL should set up a little “Go Fund Me” account so we could all chip in and cover the $170 for you (actually, I have no idea how “Go Fund Me” works, but I’m sure someone on here does.

      • TS

        @Mike G

        Was your passport card requested to be returned with the passport? If it was not requested, then it stands to be a good second ID nationally until it expires and not used for further travel. If it was requested, then this point is moot. Please let us know. Thanks.

        • David

          @TS: I would think that both the passport booklet and the passport ID card have the same identification number on them. If the passport is revoked, then most likely that ID number is cancelled. And if that passport card shows up anywhere, it will appear on computer screens as “Revoked” and will likely be confiscated on the spot.

        • TS

          @David

          Until @Mike G replies, I’ll withhold comment. They’ll have the same number but what does the letter rev say he received about one or both?

        • Mike G

          @TS

          Unfortunately, my revocation letter specifically demanded I return my passport book and passport card (each were identified by number – not the same number).

          Of course, you cannot apply for a new passport card because it cannot be marked (Oh, I suppose they could come up with a way to mark it, but then it would be so obvious you probably wouldn’t want to show it anyway).

        • TS

          @Mike G

          Thank you for the info WRT your passport and passport card being different numbers and also being jointly revoked. That is helpful here for those tracking this effort.

  34. C

    I’m so sorry to hear about this. What a shame and pray that you’re able to resolve it quickly and restore a sense of normalcy. God bless you.

  35. David

    @ AMH: Hang in there, AMH (figuratively, NOT literally). Try to focus on the immediate challenge and take it one day at a time. I know it may look bleak at times, but we DO continue to make progress. Keep your head up, keep fighting, and bear in mind THEY are wrong, not us!! We are not second class citizens.

    • Facts should matter

      I saw where that judge in Alabama claimed that we’re not “second class citizens,” but the paradox is, many on here claim that we’re not a “protected class.” Either way, being on the registry is a demeaning/dysfunctional existence and permanent nightmare.

  36. Josh

    For anybody following the developments in Michigan: I had a meeting with my attorney today and from what I was told it would appear that the hearings on the Betts & Snyder cases on March 6th may be an attempt to hasten the relief due from both the Does/Snyder cases. A positive ruling in our favor would nullify the need for the aclu to continue negotiations. As @AJ has stated the MI SC is basically boxed in now that AG Nessel has filed those briefs supporting our position. More food for thought…..it is almost certain that Ms. Nessel did not file those briefs without the blessings of her boss Governor Whitmer. It would appear that a real effort to achieve some resolution is finally at hand. My attorney also speculated that MI SC may just hear the arguments and rule in our favor in short order based on AG’s lack of apparent opposition. Apparently, these types of hearings are rarely used and can be a bit of a circus. This is all a educated guess on the part of my lawyer but it seems to make sense given all the recent developments. Thoughts?

    • DD

      Hey AMH, don’t buy this BS. Most people are just hypocrites. Only you know who you really are, and remember that in the end we only have 1 judge. F**K EVERYBODY ELSE THAT JUDGES YOU. THAT’S HOW I GET BY, HOPE IT HELPS YOU.

    • AJ

      @Josh:
      I absolutely agree the AG is working with at least the tacit approval of the Governor. I doubt anything will ever come out regarding that, thus giving the Gov. deniability, but who cares as long as our ends are served? Your attorney certainly has a better feel of the pulse than I, but FWIW I think s/he’s spot-on.

      I can’t wait to listen to the circus! 🙂 I just don’t see any way “out” for the State on this, since the appellate level above MI SC (read: SCOTUS) has already given its “no decision” denial of cert. I really hope MI SC blows it up and says punitive and non-severable.

  37. Matthew

    Let me ask anyone on here, if the registered is not to be used for employment decisions as stated in 290, why are we allowing background check companies to search the registry when conducting a check for applicants? If we have no criminal record after expungement and do not have to disclose it, why else we get declined a job after we appear on these checks? Its ironic that attorneys turn a blind eye to that.

    Cal. PC 290.46(l)(2)(E):

    Use of any information from the Megan’s Law Database for purposes relating to any of the following is prohibited:

    Health insurance
    Insurance
    Loans
    Credit
    Employment
    Education, scholarships, or fellowships.
    Housing or accommodations.
    Benefits, privileges, or services provided by any business establishment
    That’s right: California law prohibits employers from using sex offender registry data when making employment decisions.

    Why not pass a law that employer background checks can’t include sex registries? Exactly cause people will pretend to help or care but it could more about following the money.

  38. TS

    A “Dustin” posted this over on FAC which I thought is interesting for over here too:

    http://www.govtech.com/public-safety/Police-Hope-Software-Can-Help-Avoid-Losing-Sex-Offenders.html

    Like to see their algorithm on the predicative part to characterize someone.

    This isn’t like losing evidence, is it?

    • Facts should matter

      “This software can be a very effective tool during investigations, said Hohman, as it gives officials quick information on offenders who may live within close proximity to a recent crime.”

      This is just a sales gimmick! LEOs already HAVE this info readily available. Further, I think it’s intellectually dishonest for us to be profiled as the “usual suspects” in the event of an abduction or assault near our physical address.

    • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

      Offenderwatch is one of the chief war profiteers in the war on “sex offenders.” Their founders and principals are constantly fanning the flames of hysteria to get a big burning pyre going. They’re on Twitter quite a bit doing so. @OffenderWatch_ if you want to give some pushback. They’re real assholes.

      • Will Allen

        That sounds fun. I’ve talked to them a bit in the past, need to do it more. They are an immoral bunch of scumbags.

        I do think it is funny that the Registries will never be legitimate because people just have to make money off of it. Scumbags will sell their souls for money. They’d sell their own children.

        OffenderWatch is also funny just by how pathetic they are. What a pathetic little “business” they have, lol. Selling fear to people who are uneducated and helpless. Sad.

      • C

        Mighty bold of them to put their names and faces out there for all to see. They’re either oblivious to or self-righteous about the number of lives they help to ruin.

        I hope they all live in interesting times.

        • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

          C, well, there’s never really been a price to pay for being tough on sex offenders or organizing witch hunts. Let’s hope that that changes.

  39. Whenwillitend

    An interesting case coming out of MA regarding internet posting—something to watch. Go to the link click on February and go to the Feb 5 impounded case: you can hear oral arguments there

    https://boston.suffolk.edu/sjc/archive.php

    • Whenwillitend

      @AJ

      Would love to hear your take on this one

      • AJ

        @Whenwillitend:
        My take is the State won’t like the Opinion of the Court. They should’ve sent a sharper attorney…then again, perhaps he’s trying to defend the indefensible action by SORB.

  40. Matthew

    Here is a definition of a sex offender according to Venture County Sheriffs Department:

    Sex Offender Characteristics

    Most offenders commit multiple crimes against multiple types of victims with whom they have varying types of relationships (adults, children, male, female, known and unknown). This behavior is known as “crossover”.
    Sex offenders rarely commit just one type of offense. Many offenders have NO official criminal record or sex crime history of any kind.
    There is no such thing as a “typical” sex offender; however, all tend to be manipulative, deceptive, and secretive. Sex offenders come from all backgrounds, ages, income levels, and professions.
    The majority of offenses (80 – 95%) are committed by someone the victim knows.
    Sexual deviancy often begins in adolescence.
    Sex offenders usually do not commit their crimes impulsively. They usually carefully plan their crimes.
    Approximately 4% of sexual assaults are committed by women.

    Source: http://communitynotification.com/cap_safety_1.php?office=54332

    • Mike G

      @Matthew

      Thank you for posting this, I guess. It is so sad and depressing. Probably 99% of the public thinks the same thing. No wonder they hate us. I mean, the Sheriff’s Department would never lie to you, right? If this were actually true, I would hate us, too.

      But NOTHING in this definition applies to me, except maybe knowing my “victim”. I suspect most of this doesn’t apply to 95%+ of us either. How are we ever going to change this narrative and get the truth out there?

      I guess we will never overcome the public. We can only hope for some relief through the judicial system, some brave judges who will rule based on the constitution and not public pressure.

      • matthew

        I was thinking of sending a professional e-mail about their wording, their definitions and lack of true information on those who do not fall under non-contact offenses. They put us all under the same umbrella and its time to speak out.
        This could even be used in court documents suggesting it is punishment. It would be a round about way but they are categorizing all offenders.

        • R M

          @Matthew… why just think about it? Do it. And then follow up on it. Fight.

        • matthew

          Same reason why people don’t attend meetings, speak up for things, etc. I just seen it and was sharing. I have done a lot for our cause. I am not even from that county but seen it and wanted to share.

    • Facts should matter

      That is a copy and paste template sent out by Offender Watch to all their “customers” and is included with their software.

      Of course it’s misleading and distorting information made-to-order for the local Sheriffs’ offices nationwide. It’s a fear mongering and shaming starter kit.

      • Will Allen

        Offender Watch is just another scumbag company putting money over morals. Hopefully someone will take very, very serious action against them soon. Well deserved.

  41. mike r

    Well people, here is my latest and probably last filing in the lower district court before off to the 9th circuit. That is unless the real judge in my case agrees with my arguments and does the unthinkable and goes against the Magistrate’s Findings and Recommendations, which I am sure rarely happens. But who knows, I gave it my best shot I know that. You can see the Objections to the MFR and the RJN on my site,
    http://mllkeys20112011.wixsite.com/mysite
    or here is a link to just the Objections to the MFR,
    https://ufile.io/jom23
    I do not think it gets any more solid than that.

    • R M

      Thanks miker, and I truly mean that. I know you (as a few others on here) are one of the few who fight legally for us. If this bullshit continues, the USA is screwed beyond belief (as if it isn’t already) and maybe, just maybe, the people will retaliate. There is so much hate in this country it’s unbelievable. There’s so much non-democracy it’s a wonder we even consider it a democracy. I’ll stop there in fear of, well them who monitor me.

    • TS

      Thanks @miker for sharing this with us here. Keeping good thoughts going for you on this effort. Let’s hope the real Wapner shows up for you so you don’t have to elevate it.

  42. TS

    The machine wants to grow more in AZ:

    You may soon have to give your DNA to the state and pay $250 for the privilege

    https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2019/02/19/arizona-bill-would-create-massive-statewide-dna-database/2873930002/

    • R M

      And I’m guessing ignorant society will gladly do just that… until someone gets arrested and put in jail for something they did 20, 30, whatever years ago. Oops, that’s already being done.

      • TS

        @R M

        Exactly. A registry were you don’t have to commit a crime for submitting it, but the sheep will think it is ok to submit to it anyway. Have to wonder if anyone is telling them before they submit that it could be used in criminal investigations?

        • R M

          “Have to wonder if anyone is telling them before they submit that it could be used in criminal investigations?”

          Would the sheep know any difference?

        • TS

          @R M

          I know what you said was rhetorical which I agree with. However, I would hope the sheep would know the difference because this isn’t exactly a DNA testing service to see what your genetic makeup is or to find the lost relative from generations back (or the same $99.99 price). They are literally opening up their family for generations to come and previous without consultation which I have railed on about here.

          It should be in the fine print of the contract one signs and submits $250 to give DNA and fingerprints over (where fingerprints is all they ready need for a background check according to the FBI database info in VA and recent personal experience), but they need to be told (if this passes, which I hope it does not) so they can seriously consider whether they want that job which the state says .

      • R M

        This bill was written in retrospect of the woman at a care facility who became pregnant and gave birth without any knowing until the baby popped out if I’m correct. Suddenly a bill is written to collect DNA, etc from well, just about anyone who cares for another.

        Sound familiar to any other situation from say 25 years ago?

  43. mike r

    Thank you for noticing. Yeah it would have been so easy just to say screw it a long time ago, saved me hundreds of dollars and countless hours. Is not going to happen though. It is all in and has been since day one. Even if I lose cannot say I did not give it my best. Thank AJ and Chris F as well. They have been there all the way. The Judge is probably just going to rubber stamp the MFR, but then it is off to the races in the 9th. I do not think that a Magistrate’s FRs are usually rejected by a judge but we will see.

  44. Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

    The Crimereport: “Miami-Dade Sex Offenders ‘Forced to be Homeless’” By Elizabeth Weill-Greenberg

    A very good piece. *** https://thecrimereport.org/2019/02/19/miami-dade-sex-offenders-forced-to-be-homeless

  45. TS

    We’ve discussed this case here before:

    Supreme Court strikes blow against states that raise revenue by hefty fines, forfeitures

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/20/supreme-court-states-cant-impose-excessive-fees-fines-forfeitures/2919411002/

    ” The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Wednesday that state governments cannot impose excessive court fees, fines and forfeitures as a means of raising money.”

    So can this be extended to registry fees too? I’d like to think so since states are getting fed Fed $$ by being SORNA compliant.

    • Jorge

      I saw this case. I’m not too excited about it’s effect on registry fees. Worst case scenario from the States’ perspective is simply that simply have to pay for registries from state funds.

      The more interesting aspect IMO about this case is that the very idea that effects of civil penalties (in this case, asset forfeiture) can (should?) be considered in the context of criminal penalties.

  46. E

    I read the articles here and I keep flashing back to the pseudo therapist I was mandated to sit through, and what she kept saying.”The penjelum is swinging back. Things are getting better.” What a crock! 1 step forward, 3 steps back. They take away on the front end, but just keep piling on the back end!

    • Facts should matter

      That jargon was just to keep you malleable and docile. To give you false reassurance of “it gets better.” I quit mandated therapy once off paper because of all the “behavior modification” brainwashing and reprogramming that I didn’t even need in the first place! Nothing changes because fear, guilt and shame is used for CONTROL, and COMPLIANCE. Another misguided moniker that’s thrown around loosely on here is “baby steps.” Umm.. sorry, but baby steps is not aggressive or militant enough against what we’re up against. Hope is not a plan, much less a strategy or a solution. Also, praying is begging.

      • AJ

        @Facts should matter:
        Now that you’ve laid out for all of us what is wrong and won’t work, please explain what is right and does work. Or do you just snipe and complain? What “aggressive or militant” approach do you have in mind? Why keep it secret? Please do tell, sahib.

      • RegistrantNotAnOffender

        You can rage all you want but without a strategy you are stuckon this registry with no end in sight

  47. David

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-says-constitutional-protection-against-excessive-fines-applies-to-state-actions/2019/02/20/204ce0d4-3522-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html?utm_term=.a9bcaf613cc2&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

    “Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, on just her second day back on the bench after undergoing cancer surgery in December, announced the decision for the court, saying that the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause protects against government retribution.”

    Really?? “….protects against government retribution.” ?? Really?? Hey SCOTUS, how about addressing ex post facto punishment?

    • Chris f

      There are many things I love about thia ruling, and the words used.

      I can’t pull up the exact quotes on my phone right now. What I remember is how they talk about what is needed for “ordered liberty” and how the scheme infringes on multiple constitional rights. It was also unanimous. Any push back against too much government control even when the majority of voters allow it is exactly what we need.

      I believe this is the best time to get a proper case in front of them. The problem is the rare circumstances that can happen and also get the justices to allow it. Taking 1% of cases doesnt give us a great shot.

    • Muriel

      I am hoping that SCOTUS does exactly that with the Grundy ruling scheduled to come out later this session.
      Ex Post Facto is part of that casse

      • AJ

        @Muriel:
        “Ex Post Facto is part of that casse [Gundy].”
        —–
        No it’s not. On March 5, 2018, SCOTUS accepted Gundy, “limited to Question 4 presented by the petition.” Question 4 is: Whether SORNA’s delegation of authority to the Attorney General to issue regulations under 42 U.S.C. 5 16913(d) violates the nondelegation doctrine. (https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/gundy-v-united-states/)

        So the *only* aspect of Gundy SCOTUS is considering is the non-delegation doctrine. EPF is perhaps implicated due to the language in the Statute, but if you’re hoping for some sort of Opinion regarding EPF, you’re almost sure to be sorely disappointed.

  48. Josh

    @Bobby
    Did you receive a email from Tim over at the Aclu today?

  49. NY won’t let go

    Just read Snapchat’s new terms of service and we are now banned from there which is funny since they allow people to post porn and sex shows on their platform.

  50. NY won’t let go,

    Have to reword my previous comment.

    It’s funny that Snapchat now bans us from using their platform but people have been using it to send dick pics and nudes since it became a service even though after further reading of their TOS pornography is banned, but I guess that’s all in the eyes of the beholder. Or if someone actually reports it

    • Will Allen

      Interesting. My life has been full without Snapchat but now I know that I must create an account. So I will today. Thanks for letting us know.

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 *

.