General Comments March 2019

So apparently for rational basis anymore the threshold (according to the magistrate) is as long as it is in the name of public safety. What a statement.

“Likewise, the Ninth Circuit has expressly held that sex offender registration laws analogous to California’s SORA are grounded in public safety concerns and pass rational basis review. Tandeske, 361 F, 3d at 597. Public safety provides a rational basis for California’s Megan’s Law and SORA, See, e,g,, James v. Gastello,
No. 17-cv-170-H (NLS), 2018 WL 3546312, at *8 (S.D, Cal, July 24,2018), report and
recommendation adopted, No. 3:17-CV-01570-H-NLS, 2018 WL 6018030 (S,D, Ca1. Nov. 16,
2018).”

How about you tell the Taylor case that? What the hell kind of statement is that. Damn I wish I would have noticed that before.
And there we go again with the analogous statutes statement when they are not by order of magnitude.
Double damn, I did not exploit Tandeske’s statement about tailoring,
“Moreover, the Court held, the “broad categories” of offenses differentiated in the Act and the “corresponding length of the reporting requirement, are reasonably related to the danger of recidivism, and this is consistent with the regulatory objective.”  Id. at 102, 123 S.Ct. 1140.   Thus, although the Does possess liberty interests that are indeed important, Smith precludes our granting them relief.”

The only case I did not state that in my brief. Oh well, be great fodder for appeal. See what I am stating? No law has been upheld that did not have tailoring in some sense. This is the only reason CA is doing its tiering. The only reason, and maybe to get those that are exempt right now into the registry again. Scandalous, all of em…

mile, lmao. oops. So yeah like I was saying. Wow look at this crap straight from the AG and DOJ website, I see NO ambiguity whatsoever in this.

“May I request copies of records concerning any individual pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code section 6250)?
Criminal History Records are not subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act. In California, state and local summary criminal history information is confidential and access is strictly regulated by statute. Penal Code section 11105 expressly authorizes the DOJ to disclose state summary criminal history information to law enforcement agencies for law enforcement purposes only, to certain employers or regulatory agencies, or to the person who is the subject of the record.”

“Can I obtain a copy of my Superior Court Record?
The DOJ does not maintain or provide certified copies of California Local and/or Superior Court Records and as such, does not provide these source documents. To obtain a transcript, you will need to contact the court with jurisdiction over your particular case(s) for certified documents.”
https://oag.ca.gov/fingerprints/faq

WTFFFFFFFFF???????? Easily accessible public record my ass………… Even the superior court records sounds like it must be “YOUR particular case(s)” for you to even get transcripts. No wonder I have never been able to find mine or anyone else’s. Sure any individual can go sit in any courtroom unless there is a gag order or something, but government controlled records? I think not from the sound of it. See this shit is what I am talking about. Unless you know this crap you are burnt. This is going to be hard for the AG to overcome here since this is coming from their own site. Sure public safety can negate privacy but it has to significantly advance a state objective at minimum, and it has to be justified by fact and data.
Man I am tempted to file suit against the CA AG right now or sending a letter exactly like the AG sent the news outlet demanding they immediately remove my criminal history information from the website or face a monetary tort suit….
This is insane!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@AJ, et al,

Here is an interesting article on SCOTUS Justice Thomas from a major source that I question at times, but gives us a term (super precedent) we refer to here in our discussions without saying it directly because we hope it happens against laws against the registrant.

Clarence Thomas Is in the Wrong Line of Work

He thinks he alone knows the right answer—and that’s not a good attitude for a judge.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/03/clarence-thomas-thinks-he-knows-best/584263/

Yes it was all of that and the cops asked me if I wanted to pursue it and I said no. It was 10 years ago. I would handle it very differently now though.

So how many Dads have killed kids this year? And how many dads//anyone on a bogus llist have…

https://twitter.com/apwestregion/status/1103806882681114624?s=12

The statement about challenging the statute is state court on state constitution is definitely a hint to everyone. It seems not only does the court see a win on the issues, it appears they really want to weigh in on it after it goes thru the state courts. Still stupid they are bargaining anything. People that are affected by the Snyder decision that are not getting relief should indeed file 1983 suit as the state prosecutor admitted right there they would lose and there was nothing they could do about it. You would think a pro bono would jump on it. Oh yeah, we are not human, that’s right. Almost thought we should be treated equally as others……….

MICHIGAN RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Rule: 3.3 Candor Toward the Tribunal
(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:
(1) make a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct
a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the
lawyer;

Here is the BS part,
Rule: 8.3 Reporting Professional Misconduct
(a) A lawyer having knowledge that another lawyer has committed a significant
violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as
to that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer shall inform the
Attorney Grievance Commission.

This is the Real BS, F*%$%& self-regulating BSSSSSSSS*&^^$$^!!!!!!
Comment: Self-regulation of the legal profession requires that members of the
profession initiate disciplinary investigation when they know of a violation of the
Rules of Professional Conduct.

Absolutely insane, just as the executive branches. Only the executive make the rules that are applied to them. Apparently in the judicial sphere they self-regulate………. Bad as the DA deciding if a cop was justified in a shooting. Or all the immunity clauses for gov actors.

https://courts.michigan.gov/Courts/MichiganSupremeCourt/rules/Documents/Michigan%20Rules%20of%20Professional%20Conduct.pdf