ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: April 18 – Phone,
May 29/30 – Conference (Los Angeles),  June 13 – Sacramento details

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Los Angeles, Sacramento, Phone)

2020 ACSOL Conference – Ticket Sales Halted

General News

International Travel 2019

We have updated our main International Travel section. It features:

  1. List of Schengen Nations (allowing entry to registrants);
  2. Resources (including a CA DOJ Travel Notification Form); and
  3. User Submitted Travel Reports.

This post is linked from the Main Menu at the top of the site.

1. The 26 Schengen Nations (which allow registrants to visit)

As an agreement, Schengen was signed among the five out of ten countries of the European Union members back then, on the 14th June 1985. Under the Schengen agreement, travelling from one Schengen country to another is done without any passport and immigration controls or any other formalities previously required.

[row] [column size=”1/5″ center=”no” class=””]

Czech republic

[/column][column size=”1/5″ center=”no” class=””]


[/column][column size=”1/5″ center=”no” class=””]


[/column] [column size=”1/5″ center=”no” class=””]


[/column] [column size=”1/5″ center=”no” class=””]


[/column] [/row]

Note: US Citizens are visa exempt when visiting the Schengen area for up to 90 days in a 180 day period (List of Countries, Section B or map).  The European Commission is proposing creating a European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) for such travelers, beginning in 2021 – which may or may not take criminal convictions into account. ETIAS Fact Sheet April 2018July 2018

2. Resources

[row][column size=”1/2″ center=”no” class=””]



[/column][column size=”1/2″ center=”no” class=””]

Old Posts


3. NEW: User Submitted Travel Reports

If you have traveled internationally post-IML we invite you to share your travel experience on the form below. Submissions will be published as a separate post with opportunity for targeted / country specific discussion.

If you have already filled out our previous (unpublished) travel form, please do so again here for publication.

Report your Travel Experience:

[formidable id=2]

Join the discussion

  1. Escape from FL

    About 25 years ago, there was a case in Florida in which an adult male was incarcerated for his relationship with a teenage boy. They remained in contact and planned an escape. The teen, who was by then a young man, took helicopter flying lessons, stole a helicopter, flew into the prison yard, picked up his guy, and flew off!
    (Sadly, the LEOs did ultimately catch up with them and then they both went back to prison.)

  2. David (Yes, yet another David!)

    🇫🇷 A postcard from France 🇫🇷
    Bonjour à tous! I just arrived in France yesterday at CDG Airport. I have an IML-notification U.S. Passport, but the French border control officer did not flip to the special notice page. She barely glanced at my passport and didn’t even look up to see if the person handing her the passport was the same as the one in the passport photo!
    (I guess Angel Watch’s “URGENT PRIORITY; HIGH IMPORTANCE” notice was unimportant to the French Border Police.)
    🇫🇷 Vive la France! Vive la république! 🇫🇷

    • Russ

      Can anyone explain the process for a new passport? Can I just send in a new application or is there something special to do?


      • Mike G


        Need more info.

        Are you renewing an existing passport or applying for your first one?

        Did your conviction involve a minor (under age 18) and are you listed on any state registries?

  3. Illinois Contact

    Anyone been to or try to visit Vietnam lately? It’s shows on the RTAG Matrix as having turned away sex offenders, but I just wonder if anyone has any recent experience.

    • TS

      @IL contact

      What did you do about your 21 day or 3-day notification to the Illinois State Police prior to your trip to Portugal recently? We all would like to know how that would went for you.

  4. Illinois Contact

    Everything went very very smoothly.

    A month before leaving I called the head of the Illinois State Police SOR Unit Tracy Morgan (217/785-0653) and asked her what to do, since my local police department in Chicago refused to take a notification more than three days before leaving, the officer saying that he had never heard of the 21-day notice required by IML. Morgan told me that the 21-day notice is “not the law” in non-SORNA compliant Illinois and that I was to follow the Illinois regulation of three days in advance notice. She assured me that no one from Illinois who does this has ever had any problem with federal marshals, etc.

    I did exactly that, boarded the plane for Portugal, breezed through customs in Porto, traveled back to O’hare airport, where I got the expected X on my passport scan, but had a very light questioning (“Where are you traveling from”) and made it to baggage claim before my bags came out. Also, no baggage search: officer at that desk asked my social number, and replied go out that door and have a nice day.

    (Are they getting easier, or was I just lucky?)

    I will now return to local police (within three days of arriving home) and change address from Portugal to my home in Chicago.

    I’m not giving advice to anyone, just reporting what happened to me. At any rate this process is specific to Illinois, and I have no idea if it also applies to other non-SORNA states.

    I’m now very encouraged about returning to Europe which seems to be easy peasy, and am planning a trip with my wife to Norway next summer.

    I only asked about Vietnam for very future planning. I know it’s a long shot and I certainly don’t want to take a 14-hour flight and be turned away. I’ll probably stick to Schengen countries — many beautiful and welcoming places to go.

    • TS

      @IL Contact

      Thank you for your trip summary going out and back through security in Chicago O’Hare airport. Interesting the advice they gave you at higher headquarters. Maybe this shows the states do have their rights and the disparity is okay? Folks here will have to note this if they’re from compliant or non-compliant states.

      • SR @ TS

        The problem with state rights vs Fed is that state rights remain with the state solely. As soon as you leave the state whether to travel to a neighboring state or fly overseas, it becomes a Fed issue. It’s like pot being legal in one form or another in more than half the states but being Federally illegal. Technically, you can’t drive with pot between two neighboring legal states such as CA and OR, or how the Feds can charge you with CP even the age of the person in the picture might be legal in the state where you reside (anyone under 18 in a picture is CP by Federal law).

        The other travel issue that I see mentioned here but have no idea how to approach it to stay 100% compliant is needing to notify the Feds for any trip over 3 days. Like, you can be visiting NY where they have no visitor registration laws and you can stay there without doing anything for up to a month, but still technically need to let the Feds know within three days. I’m willing to bet that not only are vast, vast, majority of people not aware of this requirement (along with any visiting state requirements, as why would any of us off paper really think we need to do anything when going on vacation?), but even ones that do, don’t really know how to do it? To whom do you give this Federal notice to that you’re going to Hawaii for a week? Sure, you let your state know that you’re leaving for a while, but what about the Feds?

        It’s really insane that SCOTUS has yet to revisit this issue. What they ruled on in 2003 and what is now, is about as different as drawing with chalk on the board as a kid and programming modern video games with super computers. Staying fully complaint with all the laws, particularly when traveling, seems nearly impossible as you can’t even legally trust what your local PD as they’re completely immune in providing incorrect information, whether they know it or not.

        • TS


          Nice thinking here. The confusion you highlight is duly noted and certainly crazy.

          The only thing is you don’t notify the Feds for three days since they don’t take notifications directly from those who are needing to do a notification as noted in the SORNA process. (For the sake of discussion, we will skip the USVI direct to the Feds notification @AJ noted in the JE CNBC article recently since they are a territory, not a state.) The notification goes through the state or registering entity regardless for three days or international 21 day, where 21 day is noted as the process (except in IL as we see) but by default must be the way for three day too(?). If the state or registering entity does not tell the Feds of the three day notification, I guess the Feds and the states have an issue because the person hopefully notified the their registration office of the three day law and can prove their compliance with it.

          As a side, what is defined as a “residence” when this three day law is being complied with? Is traveling to HI and staying at the hotel for 9 days changing your residence if you have not worked to establish it as a residence, e.g. utility bill, insurance, voter registration, etc? Is doing a Griswold family vacation in the station wagon across the states for weeks changing your residence? You get the point.

        • AJ

          @SR & @TS:
          I believe we’re probably safe under the same logic addressed in this CA SC case:

          While one could be dragged into court for a violation, a court would probably throw it out.

    • AJ

      @Illinois Contact:
      “I will now return to local police (within three days of arriving home) and change address from Portugal to my home in Chicago.”
      Could you please expand on this? Why did you (have to?) change your address to Portugal? I don’t recall anyone else doing this unless actually moving to and fro.

      • SR @ AJ

        I believe, at least in CA, if your going to be gone from your home for more than 5 days, you technically need to register out your address as if you were moving. I can’t really point to what particular part of the law this is, but I know I’ve been told this by several people working within the system in one capacity or another. It’s one of the million rules that most don’t even know exists, let alone follows. Seems like majority of the rules that apply to us are not present on those annual forms that we initial. Going by just that form, you’re left with a ton of holes in what you’re actually have to do like that whole federal 3-day notification for travel across state lines. Learning all this is one of the things I do not like about regularly visiting this site. It’s nothing against this great site and people working for it, but I seem to constantly learn about the plethora of mines I previously was completely oblivious to as no one, at any point, provided me or seemingly anyone else with an actual guide. The fact that we seemingly never hear of people being prosecuted for missing one of these travel rules, is of little comfort to me. What little traveling I do do, I’m always filled with anxiety of having done something potentially wrong for whatever location I’m visiting.

      • Lake County

        AJ, That’s a very good question. He didn’t change his residency, he just went on vacation. Since most States don’t define what is residency other than a location you regularly reside for more than a certain number of days, then the dictionary definition would be used by default. Since he did not move his residence, why would he need to re-register upon returning home to his primary residence? At most, if the location he was traveling to required registration, then perhaps he would be required to de-register from that country. It’s time for the courts to interpret these mixed up rules.

      • Illinois Contact

        In Illinois if you leave your current address — to move permanently to a new address or go on vacation — it’s the same “change of address,” which you must register three days before moving and then register back home three days after returning.

        Here’s the rule: “Temporary absences for more than 3 days in a calendar year require you to register your new address.”

        • AJ

          @Illinois Contact:
          While I’m not doubting what you say, something seems out of sorts here.

          Having to register a “new address” doesn’t necessarily mean the abandonment of an “old” address. It could simply mean new as in “additional”, such as buying a snowbird condo or something. So while I could see IL requiring to you list you new–as in “also”–address, having you de-register and then re-register serves no purpose and achieves nothing. To me, “new address” is vague in its meaning. If I own property outside IL, do I have to de-register my (still current and correct) IL residence and “move” to my ex-IL property? This makes little, actually no, sense. Also, if I’ve already owned the property but am simply vacationing there, it’s not “new” in any sense–I’ve owned it for years!

        • TS


          Because they can. That’s all that matters. It’s an extra hurdle so it inflicts a little extra intended pain. Don’t expect skill and cunning to work when stupid will do.

        • Illinois Contact

          @AJ Yes, of course it makes no sense, as do most of the registration restrictions.

          First, there’s no “additional” address in the Illinois registry. You have one current residence address, which changes if you are anywhere else for more than three days.

          Technically, let’s say you live in Chicago and have a house at the beach in Michigan, and you spend four nights (more than three) at that house (and not in your house in Chicago), you have to go three days before leaving for Michigan to your local PD and register an “address change” to the house in Michigan, and then within three days of coming home return to the PD in Chicago and register an “address change” to your address at home in Chicago.

          I doubt that many SORs actually do this, we just kind of ignore the technicalities.

          I have had it explained to me that the rationale is that at least once a year everyone is supposed to (but not always) get a “compliance check” by a lone police officer who comes to your door and asks for your ID (if you’re home — what if your out at the grocery store?), and then says “Have a nice day” and leaves (hopefully not seen by your neighbors). They are usually polite and brief.

          So, you have a three-day window of “non compliance” if you’re away from your registered residence, and the officer (by weird chance) shows up. BUT, if the officer comes back and you’re still not at home after the three day period, you could theoretically be in violation. That’s why you have to register your “temporary” address, so the compliance officer will not show up at your door and find you’re not there. Because the registry says you are “our of state” (if in Michigan, for example, and you have so registered. I have checked when I have been away and yes, it does say that.

          Absurd? No doubt. And we have to gauge the liability of short trips away from home (and the trouble of registration — it typically takes at the better part of a full day at the CPD to register something as simple as an address change). My trigger is two weeks away, after which I would become nervous, and then I do register my “new address.”

        • Illinois Contact

          Two more thoughts:
          If I fly anywhere (as opposed to drive and certainly if abroad), I always register, since there will be a record of my out of state travel.
          And, the line I quoted (on September 24) is on the registration form which you initial.

        • TS

          Heaven forbid Illinois Contact or any person underneath the same legal paradigm they must follow has a longer than 3 days stay in a medical facility! I wonder if you were to register a medical facility as your residence because you’re there for longer than three days someone’s going to have a hissy fit.

        • Will Allen

          That’s criminal. That is treating a person as if he/she is on probation or parole. If you Register a home in Illinois and one anywhere else, it literally is none of their business where you are. Your homes are Registered. Their lies of “informing” your neighbors has been met. There is no other burden. Those scumbag criminals need to be hauled into court and burned alive.

          And this kind of nonsense is yet another great reason to never allow them to do “compliance checks” or speak to you other than when you are forced to, in writing and at their criminal location.

        • AJ

          @Illinois Contact:
          Thanks for the informative post regarding the (useless and ridiculous) rules for IL RCs. It makes me shake my head at the stupidity of how much work they’re creating for you (not that they care) and themselves (they probably still don’t care since they get paid and can’t get fired). Then again, having lived in IL for a number of years a number of years back, it doesn’t surprise me how messed up they’ve made it. Springfield has never been a shining example of legislative thought or action. Please also know I wasn’t at all doubting you copied the language verbatim–sadly, it didn’t even enter my mind that it could be such worthless text as that. Given what you said about there only being a place for a single property address, it mitigates the vagueness.

          Regarding the (poor, pitiful) lone TBL doing compliance checks. I guarantee you that unless s/he happens to come while I’m mowing, s/he will miss me every single time. (@Lake County: was it you who plays continuous Hide & Seek with the local TBLs? That still makes me chuckle and I’d love to hear any new tales.) And even if s/he comes while I’m mowing, I’ll exercise my constitutional right to retreat into my residence as soon as I see her/him. Mind you I won’t run into my house because courts claim running away is enough to raise reasonable suspicion…which in this case would mean s/he’ll also claim exigency and barge into the house.

          I get why people comply with the TBLs, but I will not. They prey on your fear of being outed, but in truth that’s a single-use weapon. I say screw them. Luckily for me, I live on a large enough parcel that even if they show up in a caravan of four SUVs, as they’ve done, nobody sees a thing–including the TBL who lives next door! (I have to imagine he knows of me and it probably boils his butt. That warms my heart a fair amount.)

        • CR

          “If I fly anywhere (as opposed to drive and certainly if abroad), I always register, since there will be a record of my out of state travel.”

          Don’t forget ALPR and facial recognition cameras.

        • Illinois Contact

          More gory details about registration in Illinois:

          When you go in to register (or change address or any details like phone number or employer, etc.) in Chicago, you are given a number and sit on a bench with 25 to 35 other men. The white number is for annual registrants, and there are not many of us. The blue numbers are for the homeless, and get this: they have to register EVERY WEEK! They are almost all down-and-out African-American men (totally racist system), and they have to spend most of the day, including getting to 35th Street and sitting for several hours waiting to be called, when they have to itemize every place they have slept during the previous seven days. Imagine that you are homeless and lucky enough to actually get a job, and have to tell the employer that you need to take a day off every week to renew your sex offender registration. That’s certainly a positive helpful step in rehabilitation and reintegration.

          For those like me on annual registration, the yearly fee is $100 (yes), but there’s way around that. I told you that if you visit away from your home address for more than three days you have to register your new address. When you register back home, your due-back date resets to one full year later, so you can keep doing this, and postpone indefinitely paying the fee.

          Bear in mind, this is all people who have fully served a sentence, no one on supervision, since they visit a probation/parole officer.

          Almost everyone in Illinois is lifetime registration, by statue, not part of your sentence, so there’s no way to make a deal or appeal. No tiers in this state. I marvel at the people complaining on this blog about the new tiered system in California. Would that we had a Janice Bellucci in Illinois.

          I was sentenced to probation for CP possession 13 years ago, and have been “free” for 10 years, but will be abiding by this insane regimen for the rest of my life. 77 now, so maybe not much time left.

  5. Illinois Contact

    Sorry, the name at the SOR Unit is Tracie Newton, and her email is

    I emailed her but got no reply, but she picked up the phone when I called and was very helpful with what I believe must be accurate information.

    • AJ

      @Illinois Contact:
      “I emailed her but got no reply, but she picked up the phone when I called…”
      That’s because she’d much rather give answers orally than in writing. Every bureaucrat (and many attorneys) operates that way.

      • TS

        The gov’t wants plausible deniability so verbally is best and cannot be referenced later unless recorded. The can’t be bothered to cite section, chapter, and verse in writing. Takes too much time.

  6. Harry

    I wonder when this IML and traveling stuff will be challenged? I am fed up with us not getting our day in court when ACLU rushes and helps illegals knowingly crossing into US daily.

    • TS


      Show on its face how IML is hurting you then you can file a suit just like anybody else.

      • Harry

        Is this not hurting you, TS? I am too poor to sue.

        • TS


          No, I don’t travel internationally currently. Because I don’t travel internationally (and don’t like the fact that some people get a marked page in the back of their passport book or the fact that you have to give notification), it is not hurting me. Therefore, I have no ability to raise a case to challenge it and show any harm.

          if you’ve been following here long enough you’ll know that a class action suit won’t get any traction anywhere. We’ve discussed long and hard here that there has to be a case on its face to show harm to particular individual as is the case in Millard v Rankin in Colorado.

          If you are too poor to sue, then you’re potentially too poor to travel internationally, then potentially have no ability to be harmed by it and thus, can’t present a case to challenge it in court.

        • Harry

          This is reply to TS ,apparently this site is stopping a reply directly. TS said, “If you are too poor to sue, then you’re potentially too poor to travel internationally, then potentially have no ability to be harmed by it and thus, can’t present a case to challenge it in court.” Is a cop out, rather a person can travel or not should not be the bar to get something challenged. The harm is done when the state says (by lying) only current class of peoples are discourage to travel because of marked passports, requirement to give advances, under penalty of law, and send out notices to destination that the traveler is there to rape children. I am angry that the so-call legal professionals can not or will not deal with this. Yet, the same legal professionals will run and bend over backwards to help illegals come in this Country.

        • Will Allen

          In the past I have walked into an airport before, looked at the various destinations on the display, and picked the one I wanted to go to and did. I should be able to do that today. I think I can do that today, but how do I notify the criminal regime? I suppose just call them on the phone. What if it is 9 PM at night? I think leave a message or e-mail. That MUST be allowed or I am suffering harm right now.

          Having said that, notifying ANYONE about travel that I plan or do is not acceptable. I must retaliate for that every single time and I do.

        • TS


          No cop out. No one is discouraged from traveling just because they have a page in the back of their passport book with certain verbiage passed by Congress to be put in there. No one is discouraged from traveling with advance notification being required. No one is being discouraged for traveling with notifications being presented overseas (or being told what you intend to do while overseas, so your criminal note is a touch far-fetched). There’s no discouragement by the government from traveling because that would be illegal as we’ve discussed here previously.
          The discouragement is within the person who wants to travel and lets them win by not traveling with these items in place. In the end, the harm is on themselves, not from the government who is not harming you because no discouragement is taking place. When you can show these have been verifiably harmful to you, then you will have a case which you can challenge the law.

          I also understand your frustration about the current political environment where those who are trying to get into this country are helped more than those who’re already here in this country. You’re not the only one to think and feel that frustration.

        • Harry

          Response to TS: “No cop out. No one is discouraged from traveling just because they have a page in the back of their passport book with certain verbiage passed by Congress to be put in there. No one is discouraged from traveling with advance notification being required. No one is being discouraged for traveling with notifications being presented overseas (or being told what you intend to do while overseas, so your criminal note is a touch far-fetched). There’s no discouragement by the government from traveling because that would be illegal as we’ve discussed here previously.
          The discouragement is within the person who wants to travel and lets them win by not traveling with these items in place. In the end, the harm is on themselves, not from the government who is not harming you because no discouragement is taking place. When you can show these have been verifiably harmful to you, then you will have a case which you can challenge the law…” You are blowing gas, again and I am assuming the legal professionals are using this same reasoning to let RC suffer with this stuff and that is why they are not doing anything. The harm was done when such law was passed and it ONLY effects RCs. There are NO other person or criminal class this type of conditions is applied to.

        • TS


          No, not blowing gas, sunshine or smoke either, but telling you what is not happening. We are not a class of people who are discouraged from any travel. We are not a class of people. We are people who have the ability to travel under a process we don’t like and don’t feel is right (which I don’t like either). There is no harm because no harm has been verifiably demonstrated to anyone by the process in place. If there was, then a case should be filed to challenge the law.

          We are seeing by those who report here the back page of the passport is not being referred to upon entering countries. By that not happening, it really defeats the purpose of the notification as intended by law. Moving it away from the back page to any closer to the front for being seen could be construed as a no-no legally because it becomes closer to the Star of David label the Jews wore during the holocaust as we’ve discussed here. For the advance notifications, you would need to refer to the entering country’s policies on registry participants and why they would be turned back. By the way, if you think we are the only people who have provided advanced travel notification, I would tell you that flight manifests are already reviewed by people after they are finalized before the flight leaves which provides advanced notification anyway, even when others don’t do it through their local LE entity.

          Travel, Harry, travel. Go have fun, enjoy life, do it whether it is internationally or locally. Spend your money, if you can, in those countries who do welcome you without issue and let those countries that don’t know of their loss of your money there.

        • Will Allen


          For me, Registration chills travel. Registration affects travel. 21 day notice chills travel. There is harm. Easy for me. I probably won’t sue about it. But I will certainly retaliate for it, gravely if I am ever arrested.

        • AJ

          Whether you like it or not, @TS is spot on. Unless and until your exercising of a fundamental right or a liberty interest is chilled, harmed, prevented, etc., a court will not see harm. That’s how the courts run and rule, and with good reason. If they didn’t make someone come with some semblance of actual harm, there’s nothing to prevent a citizen for suing over every single law on the books! I don’t like driving 55. I think I’ll sue. I don’t like stopping at red lights. I think I’ll sue. These may seem petty examples, but they are also possible examples. Using the “harm criteria”, the courts avoid frivolous claims such as these.

          There are a few other things to consider here, too. First, a passport is technically owned by the USG and is merely issued to you for your use–just like a USG ID badge is issued to an employee for use but remains USG property. Second, the use of a passport, as it says inside, is a request to another country by our Secretary of State for the other country to allow you in. This is called diplomacy, and the “host” country can deny entry–this is true whether it’s @Harry or it’s a newly selected Ambassador. Third, POTUS has broad (and nearly exclusive) constitutional authority regarding diplomacy. Absent a clear demonstration of harm, a court will defer to the Executive Branch. Fourth, nowhere has the USG ever said a “class” of people are discouraged from travel–nor would it, since SCOTUS has already slapped it silly with that back in the 50s. Technically, the passport marking is a factual statement of information the USG wishes to share via a diplomatic document with another country. It has that right. We may not like it, but that’s how it lies.

          Now, that doesn’t mean it’s “game over” regarding the marker. If someone can show harm to a right or interest (which would be subject to intermediate or strict scrutiny) or can overcome the steep hill of Rational Basis review, a court could well order the USG to cease such activity. However right now there is no proof the text in the passport is doing anything to anyone. As @TS pointed out, nobody has reported it ever seeming to be read or noticed; in fact, quite the opposite has happened, with people saying it was NOT looked at. If it’s not being looked at, then it in and of itself is not causing any harm. BTW, avoiding stigma and/or embarrassment are not protected interests or rights.

          Finally, if you’re too poor to sue, you can request to proceed “in forma pauperis.” If approved, the court fees would be waived, the USMS would be your free process servers, and you charge ahead pro se.

          Actually, placing the text anywhere in or on a passport besides the Endorsements section probably is against some international agreement(s).

      • SR @ TS

        While the standard you describe may be true, particularly for us, it is pretty BS that the governments preemptive assumption that we’re guilty, thus requiring all these things, gets full traction, while we don’t get the same preemptive assumption of it causing us harm. This is basically being in criminal court of any matter with the presumption that you’re guilty because you’re here and it’s up to you to prove your innocence. That’s not how the justice system is being sold to the public. And just about everything we’re suffering, directly or not, comes down to the horrible 2003 ruling that anything RSO is “civil” in nature, thus doesn’t get the same protections that someone like Charles Manson would technically have extended to him.

        • TS


          I see your frustration and understand it. In this country, the basis was/is always innocent until proven guilty, which I will caveat within a court of law. I would caveat that even further by sitting in the court of public opinion everybody’s guilty until proven innocent whether it’s a military, federal, state, county, territorial, reservation, or city court.

          Yes, mouthpieces will say everybody is innocent until proven guilty because that’s the right thing to say but in the reality of it is it’s actually the opposite in this country nowadays. It’s a shame where our country has come from to where it is today. I would also tend to say that the public is much smarter today than it used to be in everybody would probably say that they are guilty until proven innocent in a court of law regardless of what public opinion is. People truly just don’t trust the government legal system any further than they have previously.

  7. NY won’t let go

    So I’m in a bit of a predicament. I need to go to the UK for work.

    I don’t live in the US and haven’t for a few years.

    My conviction was a no contest plea from 2007

    I’m on the NY registry but not the national one.

    Does anyone who lives outside of the US have any anecdotes of traveling to the UK?

    How does this even work 😂

    • Illinois Contact

      There is no separate national registry. It’s just a compilation of the state registries. I don’t think your living outside US is relevant.

      I was turned away at Heathrow and made to return home (at great expense) with a probation conviction as old as yours. The Customs is linked to the US database and the officer will easily flag your conviction and reject you.

      Where do you live now? Europe? As a test you could take the Eurostar from Paris to London and then if you are sent back it would not be too costly.

      Frankly, from personal experience and everything I have read, there’s no hope of your getting into the UK.

      • NY won’t let go

        I said the national one because in the nSOR website there is no information listed about me other than out of country.

        Not living in Europe. I live in an undisclosed location in Asia 😅

        Most of the reports I’ve read were going to or from the US and the people all still lived in the US and had a US address. My only tie to the country is my passport and the registry.

        I’m pretty sure by UK standards my crime would be considered spent as my sentence was only about 7 months. But then again Martha Stewart was banned and she isn’t even on the registry.

        • Tuna

          Wondering if either 1) Martha went before her conviction was ‘spent’, or 2) if she was not going as a tourist and was actually going for a paid gig and thus had to apply for a visa where would have likely disclosed her conviction, 3) both.

      • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

        It’s been awhile, but the last trip I took a number of years ago from London to Paris on Eurostar involved a level of passport scrutiny and database checking the equal of Heathrow.

        • AJ

          @Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly
          “It’s been awhile, but the last trip I took a number of years ago from London to Paris on Eurostar involved a level of passport scrutiny and database checking the equal of Heathrow.”
          Between Brexit and Syrian refugees, I’m sure it’s as before, if not worse.

    • Relief

      @NY wont let go: The UK is part of the “five-eyes” countries which are directly tied in to criminal databases. It’s why nearly everyone trying to enter Canada encounters questions to any past conviction. Also, sex offenses may be treated differently under the UK ‘spent’ conviction rules.

      I don’t recall anyone who is no longer required to registry by a country-move who has reported on UK travel. Even persons no longer required to register can encounter problems with UK immigration post-relief (regardless of being out of the NSOR).

      One possible option if you can do this: Fly into Paris where you should not have any issues regardless, Then take to the Chunnel train to London ~2 hr and cheap. The passport control is much less strict (no advanced check-in, etc) then travel by air. Not positive if this would work, but much less risk then flying directly to UK if you can do it this way. (Keep in mind, that you may still have obligations to report to police in the UK by just having the old offense, just like if you visited a state in the USA for X days. Research their requirements.)

      Going to the UK in your situation would be the ultimate ‘test’ of Intl travel while being off the registry by relocating countries.

      Hope it works out for you. Please keep us posted.

      • TS


        Five Eyes is intelligence related (signals specifically) and always has been since the beginning when the countries entered into the agreement, which also includes 1) greater surveillance of the internet which is where one can see if one is a registry participant which could lead the country to turning back a person based upon their policy and 2) surveillance on each other’s countries citizenry [unofficially of course because we don’t spy on allied countries (just ask Merkel from Germany) ;0)] much to the chagrin of many. Having your friends spy on your country and you use the data from it because it is illegal to spy on your own is a way around that little rule.

        So, if our allied nation friends are truly tied into our criminal databases (and we are tied into theirs, e.g. Scotland Yard, which I doubt), please state your source (a reference to the agreement in detail would be helpful) and I will stand corrected.

        • Relief

          @TS- You are completely correct. I just mis-used “five eyes” as short hand for the countries + Japan which seem to often coordinate criminal data sharing though the use of INTERPOL. However, there is an agreement from 2017 between US and the UK for direct criminal information sharing between ARCO and FBI CJISD. Here is the link:

          Also on Apr 9, 2019, the final details on ECRIS were signed which includes the UK. The link is here:

          Regardless of my comment to NY wont let go, he should remember that he would possibly need to disclose his conviction on a UK entry/immigration doc, which I do not believe is the case with the land/train crossing from Paris since he already passed through EU immigration control (but not certain now in 2019).

        • TS


          Thank you for the clarification on that and providing the sources with the most recent information. That’s very helpful for us to understand.

    • AJ

      @NY won’t let go:
      I see three options. 1) Travel and roll the dice. 2) Don’t go. 3) Ask the Brits via the local consulate/embassy. I suppose a fourth option is to try entering some other, closer Five Eyes country and see what happens. If they bounce you, the UK almost assuredly will, too. If they don’t, the UK may STILL bounce you, but personally it would boost my confidence of getting into the UK. That it’s a business trip makes it all a bit dicier. Tough call, mate.

      • NY won’t let go

        Thanks for all the responses.

        I spend a good amount of time googling yesterday.

        What I discovered was
        1. US citizens use the egate in the UK now.

        2. The UKs requirements for their own citizens aren’t as harsh and even if you’re on the lifetime registry you can apply to be off it in 15 years of being on it.

        3. The government gives tips on how to travel and find work if you’re on the registry in the UK

        On a side note I applied to renew my passport. Total processing time was 5 business days from when I handed in the form until it arrived at the embassy. Due to them having only certain dates and times for me to pick up I haven’t gone yet

        • NY won’t let go

          Just went on the UK gov website and it has this on there

          ”You may want to apply for a visa if you have a criminal record or you’ve previously been refused entry into the UK.“

          After filling out the form if I would need a visa

  8. Mike G

    We just returned from a 17 day trip through the Balkan area of Eastern Europe. We flew Turkish Airlines from SFO to Istanbul, changed planes in the International Transfer area of the new huge airport there, and flew on to Athens, Greece. There were no issues with any of this (I posted this earlier). After a day visiting Athens by walking around and using the Metro, we joined a tour group for a bus tour of this part of Europe. Our first border crossing was in to North Macedonia. When we arrived at the border, the tour leader went through the bus collecting everyone’s passport, which she then turned over to the border agents to process while we stayed on the bus. About 15 minutes later, a border officer emerged from his office holding one passport, and walked over to our bus. I figured now it all begins. I pictured myself being led off the bus and at least being interviewed, and at most being told that I couldn’t enter the country. But lo and behold, it wasn’t me, but another passenger who was hauled off the bus and questioned for about half an hour, and then was allowed to return to the bus. The tour leader announced that there was some issue with his passport (from somewhere in South America, I think) but that it was resolved. A little while later, the tour leader came back on the bus with everyone’s passport, returned them all to us, and the bus headed into North Macedonia.

    We proceeded to visit nine more countries, Albania, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary, Serbia, and Bulgaria, before returning to Greece. We knew Croatia wouldn’t be a problem from the excellent reports from Steve, and we knew Slovenia and Hungary wouldn’t be a problem because they are both Schengen and we had been to both of them before. But the bottom line is, we had no problems anywhere!

    Every border crossing was a different experience. Most of the time, our passports were gathered, taken into the customs office and then returned to us while we waited on the bus. Sometimes we had to go through this process when leaving a country, drive a couple of hundred yards, and repeat the process to enter the new country. Sometimes we all had to get off the bus and walk through the customs office to have our passports scanned. A couple of times, the officials for the two countries were sharing the office, so we handed our passports to the first official, who scanned them and then stamped them, and then we handed our passports to the person sitting next to him, who scanned them and stamped them for the new country we were entering. In the case of Croatia, we had to leave the country and then re-enter the country (as Steve described in an earlier post), and between Slovenia and Hungary, we didn’t even have to stop – just drove right across the border because they are both Schengen.

    Bottom line, we had no issues traveling from country to country on the bus. It was a bit disconcerting having our passports taken away and then returned later, but it was a non-issue. Also, some of the hotels we stayed in wanted to scan our passports, and a couple of times we had to leave them with the front desk and then pick them up later.

    Of course I can’t speak for the times when I was not in possession of my passport, but in all the times I watched my passport being scanned and stamped, I never saw anyone look at the marked page in the back of my passport. And when the passport was scanned, I’m guessing that the scanner was just making a copy of the page, as opposed to reading some code or RFID that might identify me in some manner.

    On our way back, we decided to push our luck a little bit. We learned that Turkish Airlines offers free tours of Istanbul to customers with a layover of 6 hours or more. Turns out, we had a layover of 5 hours and 55 minutes, so we decided we would go for it. Visas were required, so we applied online, and we were immediately granted Visas. We flew into Istanbul, and headed for passport control. The website said that the passport control people would know that we had visas, but it turns out they didn’t, so we had to bring up our Visas on our cellphone screens and show the agent. He copied down the information and let us pass into Turkey. The new airport is so large that it took us over half an hour to find the place where we could sign up for a tour, but we made it just in time. We boarded a bus with a tour guide and drove into Istanbul, which was about a 40 minute drive from the airport. We spent about 3 hours driving and walking around Istanbul, taking lots of pictures, and eating in a little café next to a huge mosque, before we had to get back to the bus to get back to the airport for our flight back to SFO.

    When I filled out my 21 day advance notice of travel, I didn’t mention anything about Turkey, because I assumed we would just be transferring through the airport, so I guess that would be one of those last minute unscheduled events that we should be able to get away with. That said, I have still never been asked anything about whether I gave the notice when I’ve re-entered the U.S. Of course, scanning my passport when I arrived at SFO, set off the usual alarm, but the agent didn’t seem too concerned. He handed my passport to another agent, telling him he wasn’t sure what the problem was. That agent said, “I don’t know why your passport was flagged, but let me save you a couple of hours.” So he followed us to baggage claim, and after we grabbed our bags, he had us follow him to a little table area, where he proceeded to search our bags, zip them back up, and told us to have a safe trip home. He was quite friendly, and even asked us about our trip and what places we liked best, etc. while he was searching. I wish all returns to the U.S. were this pleasant.

    In conclusion, and after visiting about 17 countries since getting it, the marked passport currently has no effect on travel, subject to change, of course. Also, I doubt that any country that is not electronically connected to the U.S. database is going to deny entry to us unless they receive the “WARNING WARNING” letter from Satan Watch. On the other hand, any of the countries I have entered with no problem could have a different attitude if one of those damn letters were to precede my visit. When I was turned away from Thailand, they met me coming off of the plane with the letter in their hands. They never even bothered to look at my passport.

    • steve

      Great news. My incoming customs experience was exactly the same in Seattle however after they decided not to check my bags and while walking out the female officer did say “you know why we pulled you aside right”? I believe the agents know all the details of our past when we comeback.

      • TS


        What did you reply with? No hopefully to find out specifically what she meant.

        • steve

          Didn’t want to stir it up. They were professional so I kept it that way.

      • AJ

        I’m guessing, “because you’re a mindless bureaucrat who ‘has’ to ‘just do your job,'” wasn’t your reply…

    • Don’t tread on me

      Mike G, that is great news and congrats on a great vacation. I am curious about your electronics devices and photos. Did you take your normal cell phone? iPad? Camera? Etc… I am hoping to take a similar trip soon and want to know what to expect. I’m trying to avoid loss of any photos of my girlfriend and my vacation via confiscation

      • TS

        @Don’t tread

        Use a cloud to upload these and your concern is gone or even snail mail them home for the same.

      • Mike G

        I did have my iPhone, iPad, and Nikon SLR camera with me the whole time. In probably 20 times returning to the U.S. from overseas since IML started, arriving in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Miami, and Toronto (The U.S. Customs has an office inside their airport), I have never once been asked about my cell phone, iPad, or camera – no one has ever asked if I had them nor asked to see them. I don’t know what triggers problems with these devices that other travelers have apparently experienced.

      • jm from wi

        Just returned from 3+ weeks in Europe. Carried Phone, Kindle & Digital camera. Backpack was searched
        Electronics were not. All travel was easy accept 2ndary/customs/Passport in USA.

  9. Illinois Contact

    @Mike G Your trip sounds fantastic and my wife and I might like to go that same route (especially now that you have confirmed the passport permissions). Can you tell us the tour company/agency you booked with and maybe the name of the tour?

    My wife and I just spend two lovely weeks in Portugal — highly recommended. Great sights, and food and wine.

    • Mike G

      The company is called Expat Explore and the tour was called Balken Explorer. This was our third tour with them, so we got a bit of a discount. Usually, the earlier you book, the better price you get. You can pay a deposit, and the balance is due 60 days (I think) before you depart. They are based in the UK.

    • Mike G

      Ironically, we are scheduled to spend two weeks in Portugal in February!

  10. Illinois Contact

    Ideas for Portugal:

    Porto, fascinating small city on the Douro river. Get a guide to show you around (

    Explore taking a full day boat trip to Pinaho and stay at one of the small inns in the vineyards. The wine is sensational. Then take the train back to Porto.

    Next took the train to Coimbra, home of an ancient and beautiful university, inspiration for Hogwarts (in Harry Potter — J. K. Rowling spent time there).

    Then, train to Lisbon. Large, sophisticated, energetic, complicated expensive city (on a par with Chicago), but many worthwhile sights.

    Then, we flew (90 minutes) to Madeira, an island off the coast (also Portugal, no additional customs).

    There are excellent flights on TAP from Chicago and Newark.

    If you want let me know at when you get close to travel and I can send links to hotels, etc.

  11. NY won’t let go

    Just got my new passport from the embassy . Didn’t look at it until I got back just now.

    Checked every page twice. There is no marker 🥳

    • steve

      The letter usually comes to revoke your passport a few months AFTER traveling. This has been covered many times here…I should be getting mine any day now.

      • Mike G

        I got my revoke letter 8 days after I returned, but that was a year and a half ago – maybe they are more backlogged now.

  12. Mike G

    @NY won’t let go

    “Just got my new passport from the embassy . Didn’t look at it until I got back just now.
    Checked every page twice. There is no marker ”

    I would think that in your case that is a good thing. Since you don’t fly into or out of the U.S., you’ll probably stay off the radar. But who really knows in this crazy disorganized system that the Satan Watch people like to play games with.

    • NY won’t let go

      @Mike G yeah I’ve been really paranoid about that.

      In other news I got some funding for my lawsuit finally. Lawyer said it will take 2 -3 months to arrange everything.

      Last time we spoke she seemed confident that I could be removed from the registry if we did a federal suit as it falls in line with a previous suit that she won to get someone removed.

      • Mike G

        That would be great!
        I assume your suit would be based on the fact that you shouldn’t be on New York’s registry (or any U.S. registry) since you do not reside in the U.S.
        I am hoping the new California tiered registry revised law will get me off the registry in two years from now, but we are seriously looking at the possibility of moving overseas. We aren’t getting any younger, and even two years could make a difference. I think if I could get off California’s registry before we leave the country, it would make things easier, especially with regard to returning periodically to the U.S., as well as getting a normal passport again.

        • NY won’t let go

          Until the last sentence I was thinking “isn’t California one of those states with common sense that takes people off the registry after they leave?” 😂😂

          I never intended to return to the US.

          Even prior to the registry my life wasn’t so easy. And with the current international situations fueling the fire of racism in the US I continue with no intention to return.

          I’m pretty much done with any person or police officer who would harass me and call me a Chink. Like if you’re gonna be racist at least be accurate.

          I’ve had friends recently who had been shoved in front of trains and cars lately because people had assumed they were Chinese because they were of Asian decent. These people were born and raised in the US who had never lived anywhere else getting told to go back to their own country.

          Not saying all people in the US are shitty. Just a good majority of them.

      • E @ NY won’t let go

        Can you share the case she is referencing, or legal theory or attorney’s name??? Would sure love to know that. Good luck.

        • NY won’t let go

          @E You have a place where I can send it to you? Or should I upload it and post a link?

        • E

          Please upload if you can, or just share the case name or attorney name? Thanks NY!

        • NY won’t let go


          This is a link to the decision it will only be valid for 24 hours.

        • E

          Link no longer valid, though I’m within 24 hours… bummer. The title was “Roe decision” but all that brings up is Roe v. Wade stuff/abortion rights. Sorry if I missed it; can you share the case title/name? Thanks

        • NY won’t let go

 This one will be good for 7 day. I think possibly too many people clicked the other one 😅

        • E

          Thanks… got it this time. So this is a case about someone with an out of state conviction, moved to NY, NY wouldn’t let them off the NY registry even when they moved back to PA. NYSC disagreed. That’s cool (“irrational and contrary to law” is a nice phrase).

          But in this decision they reference another case from a NY criminal court that same year 2009 in which the lower court found a guy who’d violated his reg by moving to CT but DID have a NY conviction WAS still under NY jurisdiction: People v. Meares:

          That guy WILLFULLY was trying to evade registering and admitted it. Is this the case I’ve heard mentioned that supports the idea that a jurisdiction like NY or WI can keep people on lifetime, even if people moved out of state decades ago? If yes, it seems pretty weak. He just moved away and never told anyone… well, that’s gonna be a problem. I think there’s still room in NY or Wi (unless there’s other case law I just can’t find) to contest their assertion of long-arm jurisdiction after many many years. I had just never been able to find the actual cases.

          So thanks for sharing this!

        • NY won’t let go

          The decision I uploaded for you from what I was told was originally part of Doe v O’Donnell, but was put to a different court than the rest.

          If you look at all the cases lost in NY they always quote the alarmingly high rate of recidivism

  13. David

    Apparently, the trigger for receiving an IML U.S. passport is travelling internationally from the US. When you give 21 days advance travel notification, it is forwarded to the U.S. Marshal Services’ Angel Watch. Angel Watch probably notifies the DOS’s Passport Division that a passport needs to be revoked and replaced with an IML passport provided.

    • Illinois Contact

      Since I did not give a 21 day notice (that’s not possible in Illinois, and it is “not the law in Illinois” — see my post on Sept 24), I wonder if my recent trip to Portugal will not trigger the passport revocation. If that’s what the trigger is, and not just passing through US CBP on returning to the US. That’s the only record they have of my leaving the country. I’m sure the Chicago Police Department did not notify Angel Watch or whoever that I was leaving the US. They have never heard of Angel Watch and simply recorded my “change of address.”

      I’ll let you all know what happens.

      • TS


        I’d bet @IL Contact is correct in it’s the passing through the system and not notification only. No one here has mentioned they notified, not traveled, and still received a revocation letter, but received it after going through the system. DoS is going to track who’s using their passport and possibly where for travel to show metrics for budget purposes, etc. DoJ is going to know who’s on the registry and why, so when a match is made for someone who needs a marked passport between the two offices, a letter process is probably started.

      • steve

        LAPD had no idea about IML and I’m sure they took my 21 day notice and stuffed it in my file. Will be interesting to see what happens. It’s been nearly 3 months since I traveled.

        • Mike G

          I agree with steve. My passport was one of the first revoked, and I’m quite sure it had nothing to do with the 21 day notice. My revocation letter came shortly after a 2 week trip around Central Europe. When I turned in my 21 day notice, the officer said he would put a copy in my file, and I don’t think it ever went past that. Now, when I turn one in, they say they will upload it to the government file (who knows which one).

          Most likely the theory about a lot of travel causing the revocation is valid. In the 18 months before the revocation letter, I had also spent 10 days in Northern Europe, 2 weeks in Italy, 2 weeks in Egypt, and 3 weeks in China.

        • TS

          @Mike G

          I would doubt the large amount of travel which happened prior to your revocation was the actual trigger. I would imagine it was due more to the implementation of the 2016 law finally being able to be done was the reason why it took a little bit before revocation letters were sent and new passport backpages were able to be inserted.

          Once the law was passed, you had to have the budget in place to complete those pages, then you had to have the pages actually generated, and then everything else kind of waterfalls from there into being able to actually implement the law as is. As much as we’d like to believe, it is the United States government and nothing happens at the snap of a finger unless it’s already in place.

        • Mike G


          You may be right, but I wonder if there is some explanation for the inconsistencies other than incompetence.
          Some people get the revocation letter and some don’t, after returning from similar trips. Some get the letter sooner while others get it later. The only consistency seems to be that everyone (that I have heard of) that received the letter had traveled.
          Then there is the new passport itself. Some people who expect to get the marked passport, get it. Others who expect to get the marked passport get an unmarked one. Is there a reason, or just incompetence?

        • TS

          @Mike G

          Your point is very valid. The only explanation that I would accept is “it is the USG and nothing they do is either easy or without error somewhere along the way to confuse everyone” which works in their favor in court most times, but not always.

    • Will Allen

      @David, Illinois Contact, Etc.:

      I’d just like to throw out a brief opinion for your consideration.

      These criminal regimes have been more successful with their “$EX offender” witch hunt by running a good, constant, incessant propaganda campaign. They keep their hate message on point and the branding consistent. They’ve fully weaponized the term “sex offender”. I think we’ve seen from history that kind of branding is very effective. So I feel like we moral people need to fight the scumbags the same way.

      I don’t think anyone should ever use the term “sex offender” for any reason. If I must say it, I will ALWAYS put it in quotes. So instead of saying something like:

      —- They are punishing sex offenders with nonsense.

      I will say something like:

      —- They are punishing “$EX offenders” with nonsense.

      But I much prefer to simply never use the term at all unless it is needed for comprehension, context, or whatever. Otherwise I will say “Registered Person (RP)”. I’ve used “Registered Citizen” before but I’m not sure about that one. On one hand, it does promote the idea that RPs are citizens. But on the other hand, RPs are harassed and marginalized citizens, so do people want to claim being real, true citizens? Perhaps “Harassed Citizen” would be the best term always??

      Anyway, I just think is very, very, very important to always negatively brand the immoral side of this war and to NEVER refer to them in a positive manner. People should just see overwhelming negative connotations and branding regarding the Registries. In that vein, I suggest using:

      “Satan Watch” rather than “Angel Watch”

      “NOT-SMART” rather than “SMART”

      “criminal regime” rather than “government”

      “Registry Nazi/Terrorist (RN/T)” rather than “Registry Supporter” or whatever

  14. Disgusted in Michigan

    @NY won’t let go…very sensible and common sense decision by the court. I had to cringe when the state tried to play the “alarming high rate of recidivism” card. They just won’t let that one die even though everyone knows the truth.

    • Will Allen

      Well, they are criminals and liars.

      Maybe people should start saying something like, “Yes, the recidivism rate is alarmingly high, because we know just one is too many, but it’s really too bad that your magic Registries increase the recidivism rate. Supporting Registries is true stupidity.”

    • NY won’t let go

      @disgustedinmichigan just a note to you. Don’t go to NY from Michigan.

      Especially if you has a no contest plea. They see the no contest plea as a reason to put you at a higher level due to not admitting guilt.

      Hopefully something good happens back in Michigan and they take it all down. When I live there the cops followed me around even after I was off probation for a good couple years. In one month I had been pulled over 33 times for “being the wrong skin tone” where I was living or because they said I didn’t have a seat belt on.

      Truth be told they scanned my license plate it showed a picture of my house and in big red letters on the screen it said “sex offender” I saw this sitting in the back of their car while they tore mine apart

      • C

        NY won’t let go is 100% right on this point:

        “They see the no contest plea as a reason to put you at a higher level due to not admitting guilt.”

        I still have the original form from the presentencing investigation. I was mid-range Level 1. I was offered and took an Alford Plea and the judge specifically said at my hearing that he was “SENTENCING” me to Level 2 because I would not admit guilt.

        Since I have the original, I thought about trying to get dropped to level 1 since my conviction was in 2003 for a 1997 offense, but the new judge, was my lawyer.. LOL…. Why bother?

        The sentencing judge is dead and the investigating officer was arrested and convicted for falsifying evidence and other crimes.

        Pan forward to 2019 and my CA city is considering lawn signs for Halloween, being pushed forward by the MARRIED Mayor who has tried to bang my wife twice in the past before he was Mayor. I still have the texts and so will CBS News if a sign shows up on my lawn HAHAHAHA.

      • Dennis

        What if in Michigan you were sentenced under HYTA, record sealing, but still have to register. How would NY look at that since their Youthful Offenders do not register

    • TR

      @ Disgusted in Michigan
      remember after 9/11, our government used the “terror threat alert level” from green to red and they seemed to always put it to orange to red to make us Americans think there’s a terror threat right after 9/11?

  15. John

    Found a list of the countries that are connected to interpol, if anyone is interested here is the link.

    • NY won’t let go

      I don’t really think Interpol is the issue. It’s the US making it the issue with AW.

      Even when you contact Interpol they wouldn’t consider you a risk if you’d served your time and aren’t on the run. But when the US sends out a request that’s a whole other story.

      • aa

        I think the interpol notice might be taken the wrong way. Apparently it makes you a person of interest. I have been told i was a person of interest by 1 foreign official. Its always been my assumption that a person of interest is a person under investigation for committing a specific, unsolved crime. It makes us look like we are running from a arrest.

    • Mike G

      Pretty much every country I have ever visited (40 or so) is on the Interpol list, but only one wouldn’t let me in, and they were holding the warning letter from Satan Watch.

  16. Steveo

    Wife and I just got back from 2 weeks in Spain. No problems entering. When we were coming back, they checked our passports 4 different times in Spain. Then when we got back into the US, in Atlanta, I got the X over my face when I scanned my passport. So the guy asked me a few questions like my email address, how long I was gone, etc… then they took us both to another place, rifled through our bags, and then sent us on our way.

  17. Dwight

    Any issues traveling to Paris?

    • Mike G

      Shouldn’t be. Several of us have been there within the last year or so.

    • David

      @ Dwight: I was just in Paris a couple weeks ago. No problems at all with French Customs / Border Control. The Customs officer barely looked at my passport and certainly did not turn to that special page 51 notice provided by IML.

  18. Mike

    Anyone travel to Germany recently?

  19. Joseph

    Is anyone knowledgeable about Deferred Adjudication probation completions? I got my passport about 6 months ago without the page 51 nonsense and I plan on moving to Germany for good and bringing my wife and 3 kids with me! I was told that I can legally say I do NOT have a conviction but apparently that’s just a loose term. Also, how long are the new passports valid before having to renew? Right now, my passport without the identifier is valid for 10 years.

    • @Joseph

      What kind of visa are you going to pursue in germany that leads to long term residence? Are you going to put your kids in public schools??

      • Joseph

        I should be able to obtain a work permit after finding a job. A residency permit should be easy to get after proving I have found work. My kids will go to public school.

        • Mike G

          I have heard that Germany only looks at your criminal record while you are in Germany (or the EU maybe?). If that is the case, and I hope it is, you shouldn’t have any trouble getting a residency visa.
          Let us know how it works out, please. Many of us are considering permanently relocating to Europe.
          Btw, the new marked passports are also good for 10 years.

      • Dennis

        What if in Michigan you were sentenced under HYTA, record sealing, but still have to register. How would NY look at that since their Youthful Offenders do not register

    • AJ

      All general-public passports (blue covered) for adults are valid for 10 years, marked or unmarked.

      • Joseph

        @Mike G

        I will absolutely let you guys know every step of the way. I am currently taking German classes now to prepare. Any additional advise?

        • Mike G


          This is just my opinion, based on reading the experiences of others:

          Assuming you are required to register at the time you leave the country, make sure you tell them you are leaving. You don’t want a warrant issued for Failure to Register some time in the future.
          They will probably want a new address. I would use the address of a hotel where you might be staying temporarily when you get to Germany. Satan Watch pledges to notify countries of your intended travel, but they appear to depend on scanning the flight manifests on flights leaving the U.S. Whether they still send notices to countries like Germany, where they are currently ignored, is unknown, but it is doubtful that any notice would be sent to a hotel. To avoid any potential future trouble, I would not give your permanent address in Germany to any U.S. government agency.
          Although most of us have not a problem with transitioning, when you fly to Germany, you should avoid changing planes in a country which is unfriendly to us (UK for example), especially if you have to change airlines or airport terminals, requiring you to go thru customs or passport control.
          Hopefully you are leaving a state which will remove you from their registry when you are gone (unlike New York or Florida). As long as you don’t create any issues upon leaving, you should be able to return to the U.S., if needed, without a problem (except, of course, Secondary Inspection).

        • Joseph

          @ Mike G

          I am currently registered in Texas. I am not sure if Texas is a state that removes registrants once they leave. Maybe you have knowledge of this? Also, I served an 8 year deferred adjudication probation so I figured I am allowed to technically say “I have no felony convictions” when I get asked about my status. Would you have any knowledge of deferred adjudications?

        • Mike G

          Sorry, I don’t know about Texas, but I haven’t heard anyone complain about them keeping people on the registry, so probably, you are okay.
          Also, I am not familiar with the legal aspects of deferred adjudications. Of course you can say you have no felony convictions. The question is, what will show up if someone does a background check on you. Either way, I am hoping that this is a non-issue when you are in Germany applying for a resident visa.

        • CR

          Texas will not remove you from the registry if you leave the state. They used to, but several people have reported being put back on in recent years despite having left the state for one in which they were not required to register.

          A background check will still find you on the “national” registry.

        • AJ

          “Texas will not remove you from the registry if you leave the state.”
          The more I think about this, the more I wonder if there’s an avenue to sue following the template of Humphries vs. LA County ( be sure NOT to use LA County vs Humphries from SCOTUS, as that was about another element of the original suit) and related cases. While I don’t think that would work for places like WI and NY where you’re still required to stay current, it may be viable everywhere else. Adding to the scales on our side would include having no further connections to/with the former State, as well as time since.

          There sure seems to be a claim of lack of Due Process in getting removed–to which CT DPS wouldn’t apply, since it only addressed inclusion.

    • Paul

      Please keep us posted. I too would like to move to Germany and have taken several years of German lessons in preparation. So please let us know!

  20. David

    ❓❓❓ Curious about your international travel experiences? 🤔 Submit FOIA Requests to:
    1. U.S. Dept. of Justice (DOJ runs Angel Watch and the U.S. Marshals Service) and,
    2. U.S. Department of State (they are in charge of U.S. Passports).
    It took about 7 months, many follow-up emails, and the involvement of my Congress person’s office, but I finally got my FOIA Requests answered. AND Angel Watch was sending inaccurate information about me, mistating that my conviction (now almost 25 years ago) was much more recent. And the notifications they send about me state “Priority: Urgent” and “Important: High”.

    I encourage everyone to submit FOIA Requests. If for no other reasons, it harrasses our harrassers(!) and forces them to waste time and staff answering our requests. (I have also filed a FOIA Request with my local police department because I wanted to know what their records about me indicated.)

    • Mike G


      I am happy that you were finally successful with your FOIA requests. I have a few questions:

      Were you able to file the requests online? Was there a web-page you could go to, or was it all by email?
      Did you receive information from both State and DOJ? Which one had the incorrect information, or was it both of them?
      Did they agree to correct the wrong information they were giving out about you? Did this correction change the “Priority: Urgent” and “Important: High” notifications?
      What was the attitude of your local Congress person’s office? Were they willing to work with you when they found out you were “one of us”, or did you have to force the issue?
      Finally, do you have any concerns that all of this might make you more prominent on everybody’s radar, leading to additional scrutiny or notices?
      Thanks for your time in posting all this!

      • David

        @ Mike G:.
        I submitted the requests online. When you do so, they assign you a request number and they will follow-up with an email. I received responses from: USDOJ, U.S. Marshals Service, ICE, and Interpol Washington. (I did not receive a response from the State Department, but it’s irrelevant as the responses that I did receive answered my questions.). It was the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS a/k/a “Angel Watch”) that had the wrong conviction date and they confirmed – via email – correcting it AND they followed up with a phone call to me within 48 hours.
        Interpol (under DOJ) replied first indicating there were 6 pages of information responsive to my request, but they could only provide 1 page and the other 5 pages would have to be cleared by USMS. What USMS sent me was what had been sent to French authorities (“green notice”) prior to my arrival in Paris.
        I will have to file a new FOIA to see if my “Priority” or “Importance” have changed for my most recent trip abroad. I have just returned from the trip and there was no indication of any special scrutiny, just had to go through secondary screening as usual. It was a hassle waiting for CPB to get their act together, bit ultimately it was just a few standard questions, no searches, etc.🙄
        As for my FOIA requests and my Congress person’s office, I never disclosed my being registered – never had to. I only stated the facts: “I was met by French police on ____ day, at ____ time, upon the arrival of my ______ Airlines flight #_____. Why was I met by police? What did our government tell the French?”
        I hope that answers your questions.
        (FYI, I was not created by a special police unit upon arriving in Paris this time.)

        • David

          Correction: I was not greeted by a special French police unit upon arriving in Paris this time.

        • Mike G


          Thanks a lot! That pretty well covers my questions. I’m glad your most recent trip was without issue, as was our recent trip (returned from Athens via Istanbul 2 weeks ago), except for Secondary, of course.

          Let us know if you get any response from your local authorities.

    • AJ

      Thanks for the primer on how to follow up on what *our* government and *our* public servants do or have done. I highlight “our” because too often they view the citizen as a nuisance and distraction–forgetting they are in service for and to the public. As such, you weren’t harassing anyone at all. You exercised your rights as a citizen.

  21. Harry

    I wonder how long will it take to get this IML trash back in court? Everyone else in this Country can get up a leave to any country they want without any notice to anybody and worrying about any green notices, RC should have the same freedom.

    • TS


      Until you can show the green notice is a harm on its face, the green notice then is nothing. The destination country can refuse entry to anyone green notice or not, e.g. Five Eye. It didn’t seem to bother @David on his trip. Getting it back into court needs a harm done.

      Btw, who says others aren’t having green notices sent who don’t have to give notification? Do you really think the manifests aren’t reviewed and checked for persons of interest or other issues? Do you know green notices are only sent for those who notify?

      • Harry

        When a class of people are single out by it own government with notification requirements, with condemning language on their passports that is base on false fearmongering the harm is already done. I have heard of several harmed individuals on this website alone. including myself. I know I am right and I am will continue to air my complaint until someone in the legal community get busy.

        • Will Allen

          Having to give the federal criminal regime advance notice and getting special passports is harm. Seems obvious to me.

          I encourage you to complain about Registries every day. I do. My goal is to make people so sick of hearing it that they just want it all to go away. I know the criminal legislators that I contact are tired of hearing about it. They just want to be able to harass people in peace. They want people to just accept the harassment that they are given and be happy that they aren’t dead. They do not want to hear about it every single day until they die. But too bad for them. They are going to hear about it. And their children will and their grandchildren will. Until they are so sick of it they have to throw up every day. The harassment won’t be accepted.

          However, the “legal community” owes me or you nothing. If you think something should be done, I’d recommend that you get it done. Figure out how to make a few million here and there and buy your legislators like everyone else does.

        • TS


          People with the marked passport aren’t a class of people. That’s been established and why class action suits don’t work for those impacted by the registry.

          If you’ve been harmed by a marked passport, then please show it in a filling to the court. Money talks. If you can cite here those who’ve been harmed by a marked passport, then please, we are waiting because it was then missed.

          Air it all you want. You’ve got the freedom to do that.

        • AJ

          I suspect the reason this debate continues is due to the different usages of the word “harm.” Colloquially, yes we’re harmed because we’ve had something done against us. However, legally no harm occurs until one’s liberty interests and/or fundamental rights are somehow illegally abridged or restrained. That cannot happen until one attempts to exercise said interest or right. So a horsesh!t law can sit on the books ad infinitum, but if it doesn’t affect your interests or rights, there’s no (legal) harm.

          So @Harry, et al, you can claim “harm” all day long, but you have no legal standing if it only exists as a *potential* harm. The prime example is the IML marker. Though it has the potential to harm, so far not one person on here who has traveled has indicated any in-fact harm.

          (As I finish this, I have a sneaking feeling I just wasted time and energy. Oh well.)

        • Will Allen


          Your last paragraph is pretty funny.

          I do not travel as much as I want to. I do travel, but I would certainly travel more if not for the Registries. Domestic and international. That is harm that occurs without even trying to exercise my right to travel. The criminal regimes might try to claim that it is not, but it is.

          Further, even having to tell them about travel (beyond what anyone else has to do) is harm.

          They can say it is not harm all they want but they are still going to be held accountable for it and pay dearly. They get no choice and obviously can’t prevent it.

        • AJ

          @Will Allen:
          “even having to tell them about travel (beyond what anyone else has to do) is harm.”
          But does it rise to illegally abridging or restraining your rights? No rights are absolute, and courts weigh that all the time. Your right to Free Speech is abridged and restrained so you are not allowed to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater unless there is actually a fire. Why? Because public safety and societal good outweigh your individual fundamental right. Your Freedom of Assembly right can be abridged for public safety, too. You don’t have a right to assemble anywhere you wish. Government can keep you out of the streets, or a certain distance back from a business, or from packing too many people in a room, etc. So go the arguments regarding MLs, IML, etc. Those arguments can be overcome, as we’ve seen, but probably not entirely and certainly not easily.

          Unless and until you challenge Government’s assertion via IML, no court is going to touch it. As well, any assertion will be meaningless without evidence of action and resulting harms. Sitting at home avoidig travel does nothing to show the law is harmful. Nothing.

        • Anonymous In Maine

          “…legally no harm occurs until one’s liberty interests and/or fundamental rights are somehow illegally abridged or restrained”
          My fundamental rights are both abridged and restrained. I cannot legally travel internationally tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, a week from today, or any period of time until 21 days after I give notification to law enforcement. There are no exceptions written into the law for people who live near an international border, who have relatives abroad, or who work abroad. There are only policy exceptions that do not have the force of law, and are completely at the discretion of law enforcement. Spur of the moment travel because you feel like it is the hallmark of freedom, and not one of us is allowed it. That’s a pretty big infringement on a person’s fundamental rights.

        • Kent

          Hii !
          You are right !
          I just Read the USMS blocked almost 4k RCs because they could, not because they were RIGHT ! Now we must ask since David had this happen to him, hummm …HOW A
          Also, its one Hell of a system that is able to do dirty deeds and call it LEGAL !!!
          We must ask ourselves, Why Are We Going Through All This Corrupt Crap and the U.S. is filled with Scholars, Legal Personnel, Law Firms…You Name It !
          But everyone in good conscious knows this is Not Right/Legal.
          Well, its good to see are passing helpful info, and i appreciate your input…

  22. Joseph

    Steven Whitsett was absolutely correct! Everybody just wants to hide in the shadows and hope for laws to change. The truth is that they will NOT change unless we come out of hiding to do something about it. They are not going to change if we do not have the courage to stand up and speak.

    • TS


      Speak when, where, and how? You have a pen, paper, computer, phone? Speak anytime you like. Others are.

      • Joseph


        The only people who are speaking publicly are the people who are not on the registry…. If you want laws to change, EVERY sex offender needs to come forward with their families and raise hell. Until then, laws will continue to get crazy and people like you will continue to sit in silence waiting for a random change that ain’t coming. I’m just giving it to you straight…

        • Will Allen

          With all due respect, your first sentence simply is not true.

          Further, your statement of “EVERY sex offender needs to come forward” is wrong. “EVERY sex offender” needs to be in prison. The people that we need to come forward are people who are living in public and are listed on the $EX Offender Registry. That is about 1 million people.

          I’m with you about raising hell. There is absolutely no reason to be nice or polite to anyone who supports Registries.

        • Don’t tread on me

          I’m not sure who you are referring to. I currently have almost $100k into attorney fees and a lot more to come developing a constitutional and state challenge to this nonsense. If you think that because you are not reading details of legal strategies on this public news site that there is nothing happening then think again. The secrecy of the ACLU and their results should be evidence enough that there are efforts taking place every day. In the interest of assuaging any of your fears, remember that there are almost one million of us. We all are suffering. Some of us donate, some of us fight and some of us sit back and complain. Stay focused and know that there is at least a small army of us trying to move this mountain of unconstitutional crap. It’s going to take awhile, perhaps even your lifetime. Make no mistake about it, it is getting better in some areas and worse in others. Over all it has improved. We WILL win this immoral and unconstitutional fight eventually. Stay positive

      • TS


        You talkin’ to me? You’re sure I’m sitting in silence? You’re positively sure? I don’t have to prove to you my actions in this fight.

        • Joseph

          See, that’s where you’re wrong. This is NOT a fight. I made a comment about an individual who is making videos and speaking out while majority of you guys are here on this forum complaining about your situation. We have already established what America is doing is absolutely unconstitutional. However, getting the community to care is just simply NOT going to happen if we continue to sit here and hide in the forums. I have written over a hundred letters to sex offenders in Texas about coming together with our families to speak and do you know how many of them bothered to respond? You guessed it…. Absolutely NONE of them… A few of them just returned the letter without even opening it… It’s just shocking how they all seem to be okay with their circumstances. So that’s all I’m saying… There is just no need for you to get offended about what I said. I am 100% on your side here.

  23. JP

    Was wondering if anybody has been to Zurich Switzerland with the marked passport and if there was any issues? Thinking of going in May of next year so was if anybody can confirm before we buy tickets

    • L

      I’ve never been but I am pretty sure you will make it in. All country in the Schengen allows us in. If you want to be sure you get in, fly into Germany, they will let you in. They do not like the registry, it reminds them of the Nazi days. Once there take a train to Switzerland. Of course, do not mention Switzerland on your itinerary or they will also send them a green notice. Also, no one looks at that endorsement. All they are worried about is the validity of the passport and that you are in fact allowed to come in. You’ll be ok.

      • TS


        No Swiss trip detail on your travel notification is a bad idea regardless of entry method if staying overnight. If that’s the destination, put it down.

      • Will Allen

        “reminds them of the Nazi days”

        As it should. Good, moral countries will avoid Registries.

        There aren’t any decent people who have put much thought into Registries and decide that they are acceptable. There simply aren’t.

  24. Puerto Rico Travel

    I know that Puerto Rico is a U.S. territory and therefore there is no risk of being turned away. According to the spreadsheet provided here on this website, the registration rule is:

    3 business days for initial registration and updates. §536c. Residence defined as “the location of a person’s home or the place where the person habitually lives.” §536(13). Those convicted in other jurisdictions “in Puerto Rico by reasons of work or study” required to register w/in 3 calendar days after arrival, “even if such offender does not intend to establish a residence.” §536c. No provision made for visitors.

    That last sentence…no provision made for visitors. So if I decide to go for 7 days, I’m not required to register? I’m not going to work there. I’m not going to study. I also have an expunged record so therefore no conviction.

    Has anyone taken a trip to Puerto Rico that was 4 or more days? Did you register?

    • TS

      @PR travel

      Research online more details on visitors to PR. They do have a website with details for visitors.

      • @TS

        Yeah, I did. I’ve not found a direct answer to my question, which is why I posted it here, a site I have been referring to since its CA-RSOL days.

        You added absolutely nothing to this thread. You were better off keeping your trap shut.

        • TS

          @PR Travel

          Did you look up an atty or two in PR to call and ask? Call down there and ask, seems like a logical thing to do. It is not an international call. Area code 787/939 is in the N. American Mapping for phones. They even have toll free numbers there. It would seem that would be an easier thing to do if you did not find your answer online or here to your liking.

          Maybe you can look at this PR atty who will tell you it is three days and answered in Jan 2019:

          So, if you are not getting your answer from what you read, as we always say here, do your due diligence and seek legal advice from a legal professional in the area you are visiting. They should have the most recent and current info for your research while pointing to you the online PR codes and section(s). Oh, and maybe, when you do find your answer(s), you could be nice enough to share with forum here.

          Thanks for coming by today and asking the forum for answers. 😉

          *PR is SORNA compliant by the 2016 audit:

    • AJ

      @PR Travel:

      Beyond what @TS recommends, also keep in mind that PR *must* follow SORNA or be more “severe”, so whatever is in the Federal law will also apply. (Unlike States, PR has no rights under the 10th Amdt. to ignore SORNA.)

      • @AJ

        There is nothing in SORNA that mentions anything about a visitor or traveler between jurisdictions. There is nothing about a visitor/traveler having to register. The only mention is of those who will reside, work, or study must register.

        TS had nothing of value to contribute.

        • AJ

          Sounds like you’ve got it all wrapped up. Enjoy your time in PR…however long it may end up being.

  25. Illinois Contact

    @AJ Is it your interpretation that in a state (or territory like PR) which does not have its own sex offender registry laws but is controlled completely by SORNA that you can “visit” indefinitely as long as you don’t work or study or “reside?” I suppose, then it comes down to how SORNA defines “reside.” Is there language on that? If you are just in PR for a few weeks’ vacation, that wouldn’t be counted would it?

    The previous poster said this on residence: “the location of a person’s home or the place where the person habitually lives.” §536(13).

    • TS

      @IL Contact

      PR does have their own registry laws and is compliant by the 2016 audit:

      As I said to PR Traveler, call a Puerto Rice atty and ask for details. It is not an international call using 787/939 area codes. Do Due Diligence!

    • AJ

      @Illinois Contact:
      I haven’t formed any sort of opinion on that, because every jurisdiction has some sort of registry scheme. The only variance among the States, Territories, and Indian Lands (that’s what they’re still called, even at SCOTUS) is how they conform, mirror, or contradict AWA (I use that term for Federal SORNA purely for clarification versus any non-Federal laws). Also, to my knowledge there aren’t any places that only follow AWA’s base requirements. Many States exercise their 10th Amdt rights and have things in conflict with AWA. The non-States adhere to AWA and then also probably pile on their own set of rules. Remember, AWA is a floor, not a ceiling.

      As for the discussion about “reside,” I think that’s a risky one to push. While many places specifically define it for ML purposes in order to capture RCs under the laws, as you point out, the Feds do not–at least inside AWA. If the entire Federal Code is devoid of any definition of “reside,” I would say the courts will use whatever dictionary definition exists. However, if a definition of “reside” resides anywhere in the Code, a court would probably rely on that for Congress’ intent. (Don’t you love how the courts always seem eager to find a way to ensure constitutionality?)

      Technically, I would say one is not “residing” anywhere that’s a basic hotel or motel; one is lodging. A BnB rental may trigger different views from courts, as could perhaps an extended-stay location with a kitchenette and associated appliances. IDK–nor do I wish to find out. (And talk about oxymorons: Residence Inn. Is it a residence or is it an inn, i.e. house of lodging?)

      I’m also leery of finding out the hard way what “habitually lives” could mean to a judge. If I’m staying at the No-tell Motel for 5 days, am I habitually living there? Am I living there at all? Or am I merely lodging there? What if I change my lodging place every day for those 5 days but in the same town? Am I no longer habitually living anywhere? Or am I habitually living in the town, but not at a set location?

      There are so many variables and rabbit holes that I believe even a seasoned attorney would be wary of tackling. Given the intent of MLs and the disdain with which we’re viewed, I suspect the chips would not fall in our favor where it’s not wholly clear.

      • Illinois Contact defines reside as “have one’s permanent home in a particular place.” Seems to me that vacationing for a week or two in a hotel in Puerto Rico would not qualify and therefore not trigger the need to register under SORNA. There is no definition of “reside” in the SORNA regulations (that I can find). By the way, SORNA controls Puerto Rico sex offender registration, they do not have a separate local law (that I can find).

        I will, of course, change my address in my home state before leaving, as per our local law.

        • Bo

 is not a legal dictionary. Try blacks law….

    • CR

      I don’t know how “reside” would be interpreted in your example, but don’t forget to follow the reporting or notification laws of the place where you currently register … (reside?) if your absence, whether permanent or temporary, triggers it.

      In Texas, I have to notify (probably in person, although I don’t know as I’ve never had to do it) my registering authority (local city TBLs) if I leave for more than 7 days, regardless of the reason, or whether or not I intend to return.

      • Will Allen

        100% unacceptable. You’ve told that criminal regime that your home is a $EX danger zone. How could it possibly matter if you are there or not?

        This is nothing but big government acting as if they can completely control your life. Little, anti-American control freaks committing crimes just because people let them get away with it. Wage war.

      • CR

        Yes, but possible FTR if you don’t notify.

      • texas-2

        i don’t know your situation, but i register in texas since 1994
        i have never had to give any info on my travel anywhere except international.
        i was told unless i am moving to another state I would then have to deregister, i have traveled to Puerto Rico several times and notified no one.
        i asked and was told this by my register officer.
        before iml i went to central america and mexico many times without any issue. i have not traveled since then.

  26. NY won’t let go

    The guy who went to Germany is having a webinar wit WAR on the 6th

  27. Illinois Contact

    ‘Anyone try to travel to Vietnam lately? Did you get in? Certainly would hate to make that very long plane trip and be turned away. The RTAG Matrix shows turn aways, but would love to have real information.

    • JP

      They require a visa for you to visit, wonder if they would deny your visa so you dont have to waste time and money? I heard you can also just put some money in the passport when you hand it to the passport control, can probably be fine then,like $20 or something? But yes, somebody who actually went would be better to confirm

    • Bill

      @Illinois Contact

      In regards to your Vietnam question, I was at the Los Angeles Meeting where Janice addressed that issue.

      All Asian countries are a no go with the exception of Hong Kong. They will not allow Registrants admittance.

      That being said if you have dual citizenship and a passport from another country with no criminal record you could get in.

      • NY won’t let go

        I didn’t have issues entering, but I also didn’t enter from the US.

        It’s the notices that the US sends out that gets you sent back. I’d say move to Hong Kong first but it’s dangerous as hell there right now. All the flights from my current location to HK have been grounded until everything stops.

  28. L

    @ Joseph

    There is civil unrest. The threat level is 2. Today though there was a protest but it was a peaceful one. So things might be going back to becoming an orderly protest. Hong Kongers are determined to fight for democracy until 2047.

  29. Illinois Contact

    Anyone travel to Belize recently? I know they have now established their own sex offender registry, but I’m assuming that doesn’t prohibit US citizens on the registry from visiting. It shows on the RTAG Matrix as ok, but there’s a disturbing note about “may be turned away.”

    • NotEasilyOffended

      It is so difficult to know what factors play a role in being turned away. I attempted to travel to Belize in January 2019. I notified my registering agency with 20-days advance notice and had secured my air travel. Three days before my departure, I was contacted by the airlines that they had received notice from the Belizian govt that I would be denied entry. The airlines refunded my ticket and that was that.

      My charge was federal, poss of CP, in 2003. Off probation, etc. Passport is not marked, not on Megan’s list.

      • Warren

        We (Me & Wife) traveled to Belize in early February this year for a few days. Also visited Costa Maya (Mexico) after Belize. Was there to see the many Mayan Ruins in both country’s. Same as “NotEasilyOffended”, gave 20 day notice to my reporting agency & secured travel reservations (Air, Hotel & Tour Reservations). Was pull over once we landed in Belize City, Belize and asked basic questions. Once I showed all my travel reservations, custom agent stamped my passport and we were in.

        We arrived in Mexico on a tour bus and had to only flash our passports to border agents, they did not even look at them.

        Both these areas where the Ruins lay the people living nearby are incredibly poor. I just don’t see how they can turn away paying visitors to their country without some heavy political push from the USA.

        • AJ

          Did your offense involve a minor? Federal or State?

        • Warren

          Offense did involve a minor and it was a state crime (California) now well over 3 decades ago. Only thing we did different was we flew in from the Caribbean to Belize.

        • AJ

          Thanks for those details. I think the most helpful detail is in describing your travel route. Did you give notification of that route, or was it an impromptu (or even an “impromptu” 😉 ) trip?

        • Warren


          Our route was Grand Cayman Islands to Belize City. Belize City was last minute but emailed my reporting agency and they OK back to me.

      • steve

        That’s BS. If you’re not on the list you’re not supposed to be part of IML. That’s something to fight.

      • Tuna

        @Not Easily – By “not on Megans list” do you mean you are registered but do not appear on the public site, or that you do not have to register at all? Thanks.

        • NotEasilyOffended

          I do have to register but I do not appear on the website.

  30. Bri

    Hello everyone. Can sex offenders travel to Costa Rica or Mexico?
    Thank you

    • Paul

      Most reports from folks who have tried indicate that, no, registered citizens cannot travel to those two countries. You will be detained, denied entry, and sent back.

      • Will Allen

        Very nice that you tried to help but you didn’t answer Bri’s question. He/She asked about “sex offenders”. I bet that the vast majority can travel to any country.

        • NPS

          He did answer the question. He just chose not to use the pejorative term and instead used Registered Citizen.

        • Will Allen


          I know you already get it. But “sex offenders” and people listed on the Registries is not the same thing. Until people start insisting on that they are going to keep getting exactly the crumbs that the big government Nazis are going to allow them.

        • Paul

          Ok. And you would be wrong.

          Have a nice evening.

        • Will Allen


          Of course not. I suppose you are just missing my point.

          Sex offenders belong in prison. Nowhere else.

        • norman

          @will allen..I agree with you..If you are on a list as a “sex offender” and required to register with L.E. then you are deemed a public safety threat. Best thing to do is eliminate threat and lock everyone up that has to register…

        • Will Allen


          Sorry, but you are really, really lost. Do I really have to be more clear for a few people?

          People who are required to Register aren’t a threat at all. They are people who are forced, by nanny big government at the point of a gun, to be listed on a hit list, with the primary purpose being so that apartheid and harassment can be practiced on them. Has nothing to do with “sex offenders”.

          If we are going to lock up dangerous people then we need to lock up all people who think Registries are okay. I don’t think we can lock them all up so we must continue to punish them in other ways. Every single day.

        • norman

          @will allen..I still stand by my statement..L.E., Politicians, Therapists and about 80% of the voting public regard us as a threat to their and their families safety. My stance is if we are as dangerous as they say then lock us all up until such time we are no longer declared a threat…then there would be no need for a registry of any kind.

          Lets see, there are, according to NCMEC, as of 2016, 859,500 registered sex offenders in United States…and in California, according to World Atlas, as of March 2018, we have 106,216. This would make California number one in the good ol USA.. interestingly Florida was number two with 69,654 registrants.

          Just think, with 106,216 registrants locked up at Coalinga, what type of government would they have? (provided we could still vote).

          Rant all you want but you personally have very limited power to change anything. Only the above mentioned people/organizations have that authority. and…with Attorneys like Janice and Chance with their fellow associates, maybe they can guide them in the proper direction…

        • Will Allen


          “What we’ve got here is failure to communicate.”

          Yeah, I thought you were a troll and intentionally misinterpreting my comments. So that is how I read your comments and then misunderstood them. But in clarification, when I said, “Sex offenders belong in prison”, I was not referring to anyone who is listed on the Registries. Those people are not sex offenders.

          Anyway, yeah, I hear you. I don’t want to get into a long discussion (again!) about if anyone is dangerous or not or whatever. Registries do make common sense and they certainly SEEM like they should/would be useful. But of course we know that not only are Registries worthless, they are much, much worse. They endanger everyone in America.

          But the progression makes sense – prison to parole to Registries. And if the Registries were ONLY used so that people would be “informed”, and if Registries existed for ALL other crimes, then they could possibly/maybe/conceivably be acceptable.

          But that will never be the case and no American will ever be able to think Registries are acceptable. I don’t think ever.

          I think if they locked up every Registered Person (RP) in Coalinga or wherever, they’d just make it its own city and county so there could be no real government there. They’d do something so it wouldn’t matter. I think everyone would be happy with all RPs being locked up there. I even think that most people would try to actually pay some taxes to do it, even though most people pay no significant taxes at all today.

          Yeah, “ranting” may not change much. But there are plenty of single individuals who can fund organizations like ACSOL or even the ACLU all by themselves. So that is not exactly “personally have very limited power”. Even then, there is only so much that can be accomplished. But I personally have a lot more power than that. I have personally and directly affected so much because of the Registries. They have been harmful to a level that few people would guess. I encourage everyone to make sure the Registries exist only at the highest possible cost. That actually matters. Other than that, you can rant if you want, or not.

    • T

      The answer is no for Mexico and Costa Rica for registrants, I was denied entry into Mexico back on April of 2016 and many other registrants that have travel to Mexico have been turned away from there too, and I also was turned away from Peru on June of that year. All of Latin American countries are turning away travelers that are identified as registrants, because of the alerts being sent out by the federal government which resulted from the mandatory notification process which registrants have to comply with for international travel, and what’s worst is that traveling registrants have to get a passport with an endorsement on the back page of their passports which is nothing but a Scarlett letter saying that “the bearer is a covered sex offender who was convicted of a crime against a minor”, while our government brings up the issue of child sex trafficking and tourism to the world as a fear factor for the public and putting authorities on the alert, as if the danger is imminent.

    • MANUEL

      Can sex offenders travel to Costa Rica or Mexico? are you on the registry? local,or national if you are you can’t I will speak about my experience I was in the registry. now I’m not no longer have register in 2015 I was still register in the system went to mexico I was sent back in 2017 I was no longer in the system I went back to Mexico in 2018 there was no problem getting in of course I have now dual Dual citizenship

  31. Bri

    Hi again. Will, It sounds like Paul did answer the question. Sounds like sex offenders can’t go to Mexico or Costa Rica.
    I’m in Chicago. Does anyone know if sex offenders in California can live by the ocean and go to the beach? Thank you

    • Will Allen

      He answered for people who are listed on the Registries. You asked about people who are committing sex crimes. Most of those people aren’t even known so I don’t know how they could possibly have any restrictions.

    • Lake County

      Sex offenders in CA can go anywhere except school property without prior permission, unless you are on parole or probation and you are told you can’t go to certain places.

    • L

      Yes, you can go to the beach and not sure about living at the beach. From what I understand residency restriction is not enforced in the whole of San Diego County.

      • David

        @Bri: In California, yes, you can go to the beach if you are on the registry. (If you are on parole or probation, you should check with your P.O. because “parks” are likely off limits to you and some beaches are designated as County or State Parks.) Yes, you can live by the beach in most places in California. (The exceptions are the cities of Carson, CA [currently stayed] and San Diego, CA [ACSOL lawsuit is proceeding, not yet resolved]).

    • Janice Bellucci

      @ Bri – Registrants in CA are allowed to visit and live near beaches, parks, etc. provided that they are NOT on parole or probation and have a condition that prohibits them from doing so. In CA, that means that most registrants are allowed to visit and live near beaches, parks, etc.

  32. Bri

    Thank you guys for your help. Any news on the challenge on the Michigan registry law change?

  33. jm from wi

    Anyone else concerned about ETIAS system in Europe in 2021? There are many countries already under the visa requirements. Our difference is the notices sent to our entry point countries. Any input from anyone? I’m assuming I will be rejected and I will have to appeal. I’ve been getting travel dates, passport stamps etc. together from the previous decade towards this purpose. The world is going to look a-lot smaller soon.

    Mike G have you sent in a foia request to DOJ or angelwatch? Any idea if that info. will be helpful?

    • David

      @ JM from WI: I travel to France every autumn. I have an IML-notification Passport. On my most recent trip with the IML passport, no one in France noticed or paid attention to the IML notice on my passport.
      Yes, I am concerned about the effects of ETIAS. I have emailed the EU about ETIAS and a criminal record, but have not yet received a reply.

      • jm from wi

        Thanks David, please share info when & if you get a reply. I’ve also been to Europe- mostly France, Netherlands & Belgium every year since 2009. Hate to lose my vacation zone.

  34. David

    Here’s some news for any Registrants returning to the U.S. from travel abroad:
    CNN: Suspicionless phone searches at the border are unconstitutional, court rules.

    I have never had my electronics searched, but we shouldn’t have to worry about it.

    • CR

      It would not surprise me if CBP claims that the reasonable suspicion standard is met for registrants because of the notice that the State Dept sends to the foreign destination country regarding our conjectured probable intent to commit a crime in that country.

      We’ll have to wait and see.

      • Notorious D.I.K. / Kennerly

        A federal judge, some years back, ruled that the fact of being a convicted “sex offender” was reason enough to justify a search by Customs and Immigration. No further reasonable suspicion needed. This was a judge who also said that non-registrant travelers could not be searched without such reasonable suspicion.

        • CR

          I have no doubt that “convicted” in that context includes those who were never convicted at all (e.g., those with deferred adjudication probation), but who are registered, and thus subject to AWA notifications.

        • NeedtoKnow

          Can someone confirm that simply having a past conviction is enough to pass “reasonable suspicion” justification for a electronic search?

    • TS

      This is a good ruling on suspicionless searches. In the same vein, we’ve discussed this topic here before so I have to wonder if this ruling can be invoked at CBP without issue by a person who’s impacted by the registry or will it make things worse when “reasonable suspicion” is used by CBP. The reasoning to do it seems to have wide latitude here including to what @CR said.

  35. Illinois Contact

    The new Etias visa program website has a page that details how to apply with a criminal record. Lays it all out.

    Sounds like if you were not in prison for 3+ years you’re ok. But, of course they’re can always be “exceptions” for sex offenders, where we have more restrictive conditions. Why doesn’t someone apply for the VISA and report what happens.

    It says: Minor criminal offenses should not prohibit entry to the Schengen Area. Travelers who have served 3 years in prison or more, or who have been convicted of illegal smuggling or drug offenses with a 2-year prison term or more, are likely to be refused visa entry.

  36. AA

    For those of you that havent seen this yet. Cant wait to see how this turns out!!

  37. Mike

    I live in California and recently took a cruise out of Miami to the Bahamas. I have TSA Precheck so flying is always no hassle. Traveled from CA to FL without issue. Boarding the cruise was no issue. It required a passport and they scanned it the same as they scan anyone else’s passport and I boarded. No problem exiting ship at any of the Bahama islands. On the last night of the cruise I got a note that Customs & Border Patrol wanted me to report for secondary inspection, so I’d be leaving the boat about an hour before other people. 4 couples (including myself and girlfriend) exited the boat early. We went through customers. When it was my turn CBP took me into another room and asked if I knew why I was here. I told them yes. They asked who I was traveling with. I told them. They asked if she knew I was an RSO. I said yes. They confirmed that. Then he said, okay, what’s going to happen is we’re going to search the bags of you two. If I find anything related to your offense, we’ll search your phone. Otherwise, you’ll be free to go. Sure enough, they searched bags and asked us questions (where do you work, etc). It probably took 3 minutes per bag. At the end he thanked us for our patience and showed us where to exit and we went and hopped on our transfers back to the airport.

    In summary, it was a good experience. Since I was leaving the country, I did submit the 21-day federal notice to my local police. They seemed clueless about it which was fine with me. I got the SO lady to make me a copy of it and add her name/date/biz card as a sort of proof that I submitted it.

    Customs was a slight annoyance but the officer was professional and relatively fast. All told, probably added 30 minutes to the deboarding process, but getting to leave 1hr early probably saved me a half an hour. Their interaction with the 3 other couples seemed to roughly mirror what I experienced.

    I traveled Norweigan Cruise Lines which googling suggested was relatively friendly to sex offenders, and if they knew I was, they never let on and my experience was as enjoyable as anyone else’s.

    • Mike G

      Happy to hear that your experience was mostly positive. I have also cruised with Norwegian twice with no problems at all.
      I am curious as to whether you have a marked passport or whether anyone even checked the back of your passport to see if it was marked. No one has yet looked at mine, but I fear that could change with all the recent grandstanding, bragging, and warning being done by Satan (angel) Watch. They are trying to make a big deal about it worldwide.

      • Mike

        Hey Mike (btw, I’m Mike G also),

        My passport is not marked, but nobody flipped to last page to check. Cruise line just scanned it and for ID purposes I didn’t really need it as it seems that they just used keycard at that point. Customs had my passport out of view briefly, so they could have checked, but I did not see them and obviously they already knew.

        • Mike G

          Thanks Mike!
          That has been my experience also. Since I got my marked passport I have taken a 7 day cruise and a 10 country land tour in Eastern Europe, with a quick tour stop in Turkey. Although my passport is now full of stamps, I have yet to have anyone look for the mark, so the mark has not been an issue at all. If that changes, my travel could be significantly altered (or eliminated).
          Btw, thanks for not using your ‘G’! We could really confuse things!

    • alex

      why would they care if your wife knew about your conviction how is their business at all?

  38. Mike G

    Holland America Line

    I’m wondering if anyone has any recent experience with, or know any RC with recent experience cruising with Holland America Line.

    My wife has just booked a last minute cruise with them through the Panama Canal. The ship stops in several locations that people like us have been turned away from, but according to the cruise line information, the only place that checks passports when you leave the ship is Costa Rica. I’ll have to decide whether to risk trying to exit the ship, or just stay on board. On the same cruise line information sheet it states that if you are on a cruise that docks in Canada, and you don’t have proper documentation (passport), or if you have any conviction (even DUI or shoplifting, etc.) you can not only NOT enter Canada, but you are not allowed to be on any ship that DOCKS in Canada (this cruise doesn’t go to Canada – I’m just making a point). I’m really hoping this policy does not extend to Costa Rica.

    Would appreciate comments from anyone with insight in this area.

    • Warren

      I took the Panama cruise with Princess and it stopped in the port of Puntarenas, Costa Rica. Had no problems on entering the Country. Don’t remember if they looked at Passports but for sure did not scan them. This was in April 2017 so maybe things have changed but doubtful.

      • Mike G


        Thanks. I’m thinking I’ll let my wife leave the ship first, and if they don’t “scan” her passport, I might give it a go. Several places in Eastern Europe they “scanned” my passport, but I think they were just making a copy of the picture page. I don’t recall them looking at a computer screen after the “scans”. I don’t know if Costa Rica is tied into a US database or maybe into Interpol – either one could be problematic I think. Would be nice to know that if there is a problem, they would just let me go back on the ship with causing a commotion.

    • TS

      Nice article on the ways of Angel Watch everyone should read if they have the time.

      • NotEasilyOffended

        “Good global neighbors!” That got a laugh out of me.

        So, what I found most interesting about the article is that it makes Angel Watch appear to specifically identify travelers that might be traveling for sex-tourism. It sounds like a very comprehensive approach that looks at many variables (taking into account country of destination, reason for travel, conviction, etc). As we have been able to piece together, it is nothing of the sort! It is not laser pinpoint it is a shotgun! On the registry? Reported.

        • Mike G

          You are absolutely right. There is no criteria other than being registered.
          The first way I know that is that I saw what they sent about me to Thailand. Included was an 8 x 10 mugshot of me, under which was labeled in LARGE letters “Dangerous Convicted Child Sex Predator”, which I guarantee, does not come close to describing me. I have to assume they send the same thing with all notifications in order to get attention.
          Also, the chart of countries notified is from 2016?? That doesn’t do much to establish current credibility in whatever else they claim.

  39. Gralphr

    Received my passport today and it does not have the marker in the back or anywhere at all. My case was military so I dont know if that’s why I was missed or what. I guess once I go overseas and come back, I’ll find out if they require me to exchange it for one with the paragraph……….

  40. Mike G

    I guess you know that you are one of several that have posted the same situation.
    I have yet to hear about one of those persons traveling, and then having their new passport revoked, so maybe you will get lucky and get 10 years out of it!

  41. chillymonkey

    Hey all!

    I wanted to give some info if it’s relevant for anyone, and ask for some info in return.

    I travelled to Armenia, Cuba, and Ukraine last year… no issues at all. I added these trips to the matrix but never showed up for some reason.

    I have a lot of experience with Mexico and I can tell you it’s impossible. Gone through every legal process, and most semi-legal processes. The Mexican government will not under any circumstances allow us in. There are some grey areas (married to a Mexican national, owning property over $250,000 in value) that have potential that I have not tried because of the expense and since there is no guarantee. But any normal circumstance is a no go.

    I am wondering if anyone has experience with Morocco? Have a plan to visit soon. Also wondering about places like Maldives and Seychelles?

    • Warren

      We visited Morocco during our spring European trip this year and I had no problems entering Morocco. We took the ferry from Tarifa (Spain) to Tangier (Morocco), which takes about 45-60 minutes to cross the Strait of Gibraltar. If you take the ferry, as soon as you board the ferry, head straight to the front of the vessel to find the passport control desk to have your passport stamped and any pre-filled documents you received at the ticketing office. It is usually okay for one person in the group to present the entire groups passports, but have the group nearby just in case the officer wishes to see each person.

      Sounds like you’re a savvy traveler, but visiting Morocco was like entering a different world, especially in you’re a woman. Have fun!

      • James I

        Thanks, Warren and Chillymonkey:

        This is really great, well written information….we all owe you. Thanks again.

        Best Wishes, James I

        PS How did you enter Ukraine? Car, land crossing, train, air? …I’ve been to Ukraine and would like to go back, but I am hesitant. Thanks again.

    • C

      An RC buddy of mine just got back from a week in Mexico and had a great time. Why was it so easy for him and impossible for you?

      • James I

        Hi C, not trying to be critical….but none of us have legally been able to get into Mexico.

        This raises the question of how did your RC friend accomplish this? Your post is pretty much bare on facts…did your friend give his 21 day notice? Did he drive across without giving notice? There are people here that have wives or girlfriends or property in Mexico that cannot get in, or go there….if there was a way to do this, get into Mexico, I am certain they would have found a way. So ask your friend on the specifics and get back to us, if possible.

        I have been hesitant to ask people on the 21 day notice thing…because it is an actual legal question I would be asking….yet, I will circle back to the Morocco and Ukraine question….I can easily see myself entering Morocco via ferry without giving notice as to Morocco, but having given notice as to Spain and France…which I have done before, though I did not get that far south in Spain or Morocco, (I kind of feel very deeply in love with the Pyrenees, so I stayed there…this was free travel having picked up a car in Barcelona).

        The Ukraine I also drove in but from Wien, however this was before having to give notice…so I guess I will break my own rule and ask…was notice given as to Morocco, kind of, Hey, I’m going to Spain and maybe a side trip to Morocco, and the Ukraine is also…notice given as to flying into Kiev or not?


        Best Wishes, James I

        • C

          That’s actually a good question about the 21 day notice. Because we were texting about his trip I specifically did not ask about the 21 day notice as I was afraid he’d say he didn’t file and – bam – his admission would be in cyber space available for The Man to use against him.

        • James I

          Dear C, this was smart of you…there all too frequently no good answers for much of what we do in life…and yet, while I hesitate to ask this also…the truth is that the question is vital to us.

          Personally, I always will give notice, but I will keep it as general as possible….(other people may fairly and justly look on this differently)…Such as, France and Northern Spain, as noted, but, I think I would fudge and say Vienna, and happen-chance a trip to Budapest Hungary, though flying back out of Vienna.

          Yet, you have made me think on this…maybe I should just list the possible countries I might enter, this may be the better, though very general, solution. Yet, I wouldn’t want notice to go out to each of them….hummm…no good answers.

          Best Wishes, James I

  42. NeedtoKnow

    Does anyone know if someone who is not longer required to register has had Angel Watch alerts sent out? In this case the person is no longer on a registry and thus not required to provide 21-day notice nor meets the standard for the notification requirements in IML.

    Basically, i will be off the registry soon and need to figure out what steps I can take to ensure notifications are no longer sent out. I assume getting a lawyer to write to the Angel Watch Center would help. Any other thoughts?

    • David

      @ NeedToKnow: Just write (email) directly to the U.S. Marshall Service and submit a FOIA Request. Here is the email address:

      You will need to provide them with all the information you can: your full name & address, date of travel, airline, flight #, country your were visiting, etc. Also, be aware that USMS’s response time to FOIA Requests is VERY slow. You can expect it to take 4-6 months before you get a response. (I typically email them every few weeks to prod them along and remind them that I’m awaiting their response.)

    • AJ

      I know USMS has complaint form and process regarding IML; however, I suspect you’ll first have to suffer an unwarranted rejection before that will kick in. I’d at least look at it to get a feel for things.

      • David

        @ AJ:. I submitted a FOIA Request to US Marshals Service last year and I received a copy of the “green notice” that had been sent to France prior to my visit there. It required some follow-up on my part to nudge them into finally responding, but they did respond. It took about six months to receive their response.

  43. David

    😣 Well, I for one, am quite concerned about ETIAS taking effect in 2021. I travel to France every fall, but I’m worried that b/c I was incarcerated for four years, I may be permanently excluded from visiting after 2020.
    Furthermore, even if I am able to eventually get off the Registry….. or if the Registry and IML are deemed unconstitutional and eliminated …. the conviction remains on my record and may work to exclude me from ever getting that ETIAS visa and ever visiting my heart’s home again. I have written to the EU for more information about ETIAS, but I have not heard back from them. 😟

    • JM from wi

      Please keep us in the loop if u find out anything further. I also travel to France nearly every year. I have concerns that in 2021 I will be traveling in the US in lieu of Europe.

      • Illinois Contact

        Europe (Schengen) is our last possible destination, after Asia, South and Central America are blocked. Can’t imagine that will go too.

      • David

        @ JM from WI:. Vacationing in the U.S.? May I wholeheartedly recommend Monmouth, Ocean, and Mercer Counties, New Jersey?? In fact, I think MANY of us Registrants should visit Rep. Chris Smith’s district. NARSOL or ACSOL should hold their annual conference there. And be sure to let Rep. Smith that you are visiting his district because you are having trouble with your international travel.

    • Illinois Contact

      See my post on Nov 14. PLEASE inform us if you hear anything back from your inquiry. It’s possible they have not determined how to handle this issue.

  44. Illinois Contact

    Not international exactly, but my questions deals with the same travel issues. In Puerto Rico, my research seems to indicate that they do have not sex offender registration laws specifically for PR, but default to the SORNA regulations.

    In SORNA, for example, if you were convicted of possession of CP, the SORNA law reads: Tier I: Predicate offenses include whatever offenses do not support a higher classification, such as misdemeanor registration offenses and child pornography possession.

    And, you are relieved of the registration obligation after (at most) 15 years: SORNA specifies the minimum required duration of sex offender registration for tier I sex offenders to be 15 years.

    So, if it’s 15 years after your conviction for CP possession, I read it that you can move to PR and no longer have to register (meaning exempt from IML), and live happily every after in this tropical paradise.

    Nothing like the exemption they have in many states that if you move there, you have to register according to the laws in the state you were convicted in, even if they are more restrictive than the new state.

    Also, let’s say you vacation in PR. I don’t believe that, according to SORNA, you have to register. The law says: Section 113(a) of SORNA provides that a sex offender shall register and keep the
    registration current in each jurisdiction in which the sex offender resides, is an employee, or is a student.

    I don’t think staying at hotel in San Juan for a week or two constitutes residing (or working or being a student). SORNA says nothing about vacationing.

    • AJ

      @Illinois Contact:
      “SORNA says nothing about vacationing.”
      But PR’s laws do, and I suggest you do a little more digging into them. Peeking into its laws (; Chapter 47, Section 536 et seq.), I found something you may wish to consider…

      4 L.P.R.A. § 536a:
      A Registry of Persons Convicted of Sex Offenses and Child Abuse is hereby created and provided for in the Criminal Justice Information System. The following shall be registered therein:
      (b) Persons who have been or are convicted of offenses similar to those listed in § 536 of this title, or the attempts or conspiracies thereof, by a federal, state, foreign, or military court, whose right to the due process of law has been safeguarded in the country where they were convicted, and who transfer to Puerto Rico to establish their residence, or who, for work or study reasons, are residing in Puerto Rico, although they do not intend to establish their residence on the Island.

      This clearly captures those convicted within US jurisdictions but outside of PR and it explicitly states it applies even if you “do not intend to establish [] residence on the island.”

      “…no longer have to register (meaning exempt from IML)…”
      The reason one is “exempt from IML” if traveling to PR (or USVI, Guam, etc.) is because it’s a territory of the US and subject to federal jurisdiction (i.e. still domestic). With no international travel, there can be no IML requirement.

      There may be a way to parlay the PR angle if one has satisfied the federal requirements. It would take a bit more digging into PR’s laws to be sure. But those who have crossed all of SORNA’s minima may find PR (or Guam or American Samoa or the Northern Mariana Islands if you really want to get away!) a possible refuge. (I guess that would make one a refugee?)

      • Illinois Contact

        @AJ I think you are misreading the law. The “even if they do not intend to establish a residence” clause pertains to those who have come to work or study. The new Summary of State and Territorial Registration Laws Concerning Visiting and Temporary Residence by Adults says for Puerto Rico “No provision made for visitors.”

        I read it: (1) Those who transfer to Puerto Rico to establish their residence, or (2) who, for work or study reasons, are residing in Puerto Rico, although they do not intend to establish their residence on the Island.

        I mentioned IML because if you are no longer required to register (Tier 1 after 10 years offense free, in Puerto Rico, for example) you are not covered by IML restrictions (21 day notification; stamp in passport, etc.)

        • NPS

          I asked an ACSOL attorney (who is also representing me for the CoR), and he said I would have to register within 72 hours (PR’s law) even if it’s just for a 7 day visit. Since we don’t know if PR removes someone from their registry after departure, he advised me not to go especially since I’m applying for the CoR in July 2020.

          So my family is going on to Puerto Rico in a few weeks while I stay behind. It sucks, but that’s what the registry does; rips families apart even if it’s a vacation. So I’m going up to Seattle instead since they only require registration if the visit is 10 days or more, and I’ll only be there for 4 days.

          And TS…that was probably me, but I didn’t see it. And since my attorney advised me not to go, and no one else on this site was being very helpful, I dropped the matter.

        • Scotus Save Us Now

          NY is 14 days visiting I think if you ever need a place to visit…

        • TS


          It wasn’t you but another forum reader who was confrontational about it. They got the same atty data from me then as now. 3 days is the PR timeline…

        • AJ

          @Illinois Contact:
          Do what you want, dude. Given how the law reads, what @NPS posted, and that I found another site where an attorney said it’s 72 hours for even visitors, I’ll take the divergent opinion.

          @TS’s suggestion is the wisest…but somehow my gut tells me you’ll go with what you “know” from the laws.

          Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go slap myself in the forehead for engaging here again.

      • Illinois Contact

        Has anyone actually visited Puerto Rico for a short time (not established a “residence”) and registered as a sex offender there? Where do you go to do that — just any local police station? Please share your experience.

        • TS

          I suggested a few months back to a person here to call a PR atty who was knowledgable about the registry in PR and travel. Even gave a number. They went quiet after. They use N. American phones so just call and get some answers in legal advice.

        • AJ

          You’re able to parse and divine how SORNA and PR’s laws apply (or don’t), but you can’t figure out how to find where one would go to register? Aye Yai Yai.

        • Notorious D.I.K.

          AJ, You are ” dIvine” and your “dEvinations?” Priceless!

  45. Kent

    Hii !
    You are right !
    I just Read the USMS blocked almost 4k RCs because they could, not because they were RIGHT ! Now we must ask since David had this happen to him, hummm …HOW A
    Also, its one Hell of a system that is able to do dirty deeds and call it LEGAL !!!
    We must ask ourselves, Why Are We Going Through All This Corrupt Crap and the U.S. is filled with Scholars, Legal Personnel, Law Firms…You Name It !
    But everyone in good conscious knows this is Not Right/Legal.
    Well, its good to see are passing helpful info, and i appreciate your input…

    • David

      @ Kent:. To be clear, so far, my travel to France has not been blocked. USMS/Angel Watch sends France the “green notices”, but France typically ignores them and let’s me right in. (Even after once being briefly detained by French police at the Paris airport, they allowed me to enter without restriction of any kind.) But let’s clarify one important point about IML: IML itself doesn’t restrict your travel – it is the countries that receive the Angel Watch “green notices” that decides whether to allow you into their country – or deny you entry and send you back to the US. That is the legally sleazy way that the IML avoids being challenged as unconstitutional. IML doesn’t restrict your travel – it’s the countries that receive the “green noticed” who make that decision.

  46. David

    @ AJ:. I submitted a FOIA Request to US Marshals Service last year and I received a copy of the “green notice” that had been sent to France prior to my visit there. It required some follow-up on my part to nudge them into finally responding, but they did respond. It took about six months to receive their response.

  47. JohnDoeUtah

    I am still relatively young, have been off the registry for 3 years under the laws of my state. My children will be moved out and on their own within the next few year, one of which was born as a result of my crime. I have done well, comparatively, and was young when I committed my crimes (15 years ago). I have been working as a Technician and Engineer since my conviction, and have my Masters. As an Engineer I have been looking at the possibility of applying for a EU Blue Card to work in Germany, of which I can apply for permanent residency after 33 months as a Blue Card holder, and then citizenship after 8 years. I heard that German citizens have more privacy rights and convictions are not limiting if they are 10-20 years old when it comes to visas. Anyone have any experience with this? I will be in my early 40s by then and still be able to restart in a sense if I can become an ex pat.

    • muriel

      There is a man who has done this. I believe he has a blog which is covered within the Women Against the Registry website.

    • R M

      @John: Go regardless if/when you can. Get out of the Un-united States of America any way you can.

    • Tedesco

      I am pretty sure the Age of Consent in Germany is 14. Would your conduct even be a crime there?

      • JohnDoeUtah

        If done today, I think so, there is difference in age element (I believe 21 and under). Yes the AoC is 14 there, but again the age difference. I’m not sure if and when it might have been amended in the past, so I don’t know for sure, or how ex post facto works in Germany (if they can apply definitions to past crimes). I just happened to be 21/22 during that 6 month period of my life depending on how you wanted to slice up the time.

        Either way, that was 15 years ago. I definitely don’t have any attraction to teenage girls these days and not really back then, she looked older than her age. And, I’ve been though all the tests to show I don’t have a preference for underage anything. I look at my 14 year old daughter today and wonder how in the hell I could have even been such a creep; it really creeps me out and makes me feel horrible about myself back then. I know I’m speaking to the choir and I’m not trying to judge anyone either.

        But I dunno, people grow up and change as life goes on; definitely not going there for that purpose. It’s just that if the United States can’t forgive people for their mistakes or even give them the option of having things expunged after a set amount of time, what is the use in trying to be better. I’m all about second chances.

        • Tedesco

          Under German law a person under 14 is a child who cannot categorically consent to sexual activity, and who cannot categorically be held criminally liable, due to their age.

          A person between 14 and 18 is a minor who can be held criminally liable – strictly in juvenile court, in some cases until 21 – and who can consent to sexual activity with any partner – 19 or 91, as long as there is no family, authority or financial component. In other words, old enough to form mens rea, old enough to participate in a relationship with anyone, or decline to do so. Such a concept!

          I think fairly recently they added a section that makes it illegal for an adult to have a relationship with a 14/15 year old when there is a certain exploitative situation, like a run-away scenario or some mental issue. This specifically excludes sexual naivete, and charges must be initiated by the potential victim or their family.

          A long time ago I found and bookmarked this

          You may have to get it translated or at least put it through google translator. While different from your situation it gives you the sections that deal with (automatic) expungements under German law, even if the mother of your child was under 14.

          If I were you I would pose my question on that web site for little money, or contact that attorney. I was going to do so but never did, and won’t.

          Viel Gluck.

  48. Illinois Contact

    @TS I am sorry, I missed your post with the PR lawyer contract. Could I trouble you to put it up again. I would definitely like to ask a lawyer about this, because I think the law, as I read it, is very vague and unclear. Sorry for the bother. This means a lot to me and my wife. We are planning a trip to PR in Feb and I have scrupulously adhered to the registry rules governing travel in my 14 years on the registry in Illinois.

    • Don’t tread on me

      I have emailed Rtag multiple times with a question and received no response. I am planning a trip to Honduras in February. Honduras is not listed in the travel Matrix. Does anyone have any information as to if registrants are allowed to travel there? It’s a retirement trip with my girlfriend. After 7 years of life on the list I need a break.

    • TS

      @IL contact

      It’s in the international travel section. You can also look up online at AVVO PR criminal defense attys to ask or write a question in Google about registry and a travel for PR to see what you find on the topic for atty responses.

      • Illinois Contact

        Sorry, I searched and searched but can’t find it. Can you tell me the date of the post or even better the name of the Puerto Rico lawyer? Thanks.

        • James I

          I am curious why everyone seems oriented towards Puerto Rico, but not Hawaii…which has a ten day free pass from registration. Each island is almost vastly different…there is Volcano, diving or snorkeling almost everywhere…(and frankly, I like tourists…people say this is bad, but I like being around interesting people…so why not?)

          Especially if you have a family and there might be problems in PR…Go to the Big Island and have some worry free fun.

          Just a suggestion…Best Wishes, James I

        • Will Allen

          @James I:

          Totally agree. I’m good with letting PR, Floriduh, or wherever get washed off the map by hurricanes or anything else. If any place is pro-Registry, ALL of us should vote to keep from helping them. Across the board. Let Mexico drown in their drug problems. Help cause harassers problems.

        • James I

          Hi Will:

          I would like to go to Puerto Rico, I would love to go to Puerto Rico actually….but since I can’t, or can’t without risk…Hawaii will do and I appreciate their generous 10 day rule.

          Sure, I’ve been to Hawaii a bunch of times…but it is still a good place to be if you are going on a vacation.

          Best Wishes, Traveller (also per your note…I like Florida, I have friends there, I have reasons to go…but I am not crazy enough to go there! F` em)

        • NPS


          I completely disagree with your ridiculous statement on Puerto Rico (and it smacks of a racist tinge). I want to visit Puerto Rico because I am of P.R. heritage, and I have family there. And because my mother was born there, I am able to have official P.R. citizenship (recognized only in Spain), which allows me to have Spanish citizenship (and by default EU citizenship) after two years of living in Spain. I’m seriously considering this route when I reach retirement age.

  49. Sheldon

    I have a question no one has seem to brought up on the Intl Travel forum. If I were to travel to a country were my offense is legal or was legal at the time I commited it, would that country allow me into their country or approve a work or study visa although the US considers me a sex offender felon? For example , possession of cp was legal in Japan at the time I commited the same offense in America. Now Japan bans possession and they long had a ban on people with serious crimes from entering the country.
    There are still a few places were cp possession is still legal like Namiba and Singapore. Will I still be turned away although my offense is legal there?
    After all, America doesn’t turn away some of those countries’ offenders who commited crimes that are legal in America. For instance, homosexuality will get you prison time in Namibia and many other African nations. And we all know the story about Singapore with it’s very authoritarian government. Many of their citizens have been imprisoned for taking a stand. But America would have no trouble letting those same criminals into.our country. Drive as a woman in Saudi Arabia, they get prison and lashing. When those same offenders come to America, they get a heros welcome (this really happened to on female advocate) So you see what I’m saying? I’m not praising draconian laws of other countries. But surely they get pissed off when we don’t respect them by letting their criminals into our country. So why should they respect our sex offender laws? Already many countries in Europe and Africa give the US the middle finger by allowing foreign RSOs into their country. Too bad East Asia is starting to chicken out and exclude us. That’s all I have to say. Just something to ponder.

    • Joseph


      I highly doubt it matters if your American offense is legal in another country at the time. Especially if they deem it to be illegal now. Japan will absolutely send you back to America regardless of the circumstances. I would caution you to thread thin when you fly into another country and try to justify your offense being legal in their country. They might take it as a sign of inappropriate thinking as if you plan on going to their country to do the same thing. So I certainly wouldn’t use that excuse. I would speak to the country’s consulate and ask them about it but definitely do NOT fly to Japan and tell them your offense was legal in their country!!

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 *