ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (3/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings


Canada: Sex-offender registry laws discriminate against mentally ill, court rules

[ – 4/4/19]


Parts of federal and Ontario laws requiring sex-offender registration where an accused is granted an absolute discharge after being found not criminally responsible discriminate against the mentally ill and are therefore unconstitutional, Ontario’s top court ruled Thursday.

While the court ordered information belonging to the man who brought the case to be deleted immediately from sex-offender registries, the justices also gave governments 12 months to fix the offending legislation, widely known in Ontario as Christopher’s Law.

“Persons found (not criminally responsible because of a mental disorder) stand in a dramatically different place than those convicted of a criminal offence,” the Appeal Court said. “(They) have done nothing wrong in the eyes of the criminal law, and cannot be punished by the state for what they did.”

Spokeswoman Celia Canon said the federal Justice Department was studying the ruling before deciding on next steps.

The challenge was brought by a man identified only as G, who was charged with sexually assaulting his wife while in a manic state. He was found not criminally responsible in June 2002. The Ontario Review Board granted him an absolute discharge a year later.

Read more


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.  
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

So…. making people register that are guilty by reason of insanity is unconstitutional?

Here is my view. Time will tell. Changes here in the US are being made. I’m 21-22 years registering for an expunged misdemeanor with summary probation. Yet, I’m still required to register, prohibited from certain careers, harassed if I travel, prohibited from visiting relatives in foreign countries and the list goes on and on. I can almost agree if your required to register for 5 years (general offenses) and 10 years for the most serious of serious offenses, but this is getting out of hand!

Nope. No period of Registration is acceptable. It is idiotic and useless. Not just useless though, it’s counterproductive. Which is obviously dumb.

But I do feel that people who are okay with Registries should be listed on one. I’m down with that.

For anyone that is prevented from visiting any family members outside the US this is what the AG in my case stated, “Strict scrutiny may be applicable in cases where international travel restrictions also implicate First Amendment concerns. Eunique, 302 F. 3d at 973; see Aptheker v. Secretary of State,378 U.S. 500, 501-02, 514 (1964) (statute prohibiting international travel by members of the Communist Party was unconstitutional as not “narrowly drawn”). Although Plaintiff generally alleges that restrictions on his travel prevent him from “associating” with family members, he does not allege that any of those family members reside outside the… Read more »

Problem is “Society” which includes All of US needs to be able to move on. That means we all need to know that an ex-offender has moved on and has no interest in reoffending.
I believe 10 years is plenty of time to see a person grow and change. What I don’t understand is punishing someone FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES.
Our children, and everyone we love are punished too.

Agreed. After 10 years, it just becomes spite work and mean-spirited vengeance. It’s all about keeping the registries padded with innocuous people for the purpose of grants and show-boating.

For society, Megan’s Law serves as “get even” revenge fantasy.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x