Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of July 2019. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil. This section is not intended for posting links to news articles without additional relevant comment.
Related posts
-
TX: Texas Cops Fired for ‘Inappropriate’ Sexual Contact With Massage Workers
Source: reason.com 11/13/24 As a result of the internal affairs investigation, three Lewisville officers were fired,... -
LA: Louisiana Supreme Court reverses course; child sex abuse ‘lookback’ window ruled constitutional
Source: kadn.com 6/21/24 NEW ORLEANS (KADN) — On review, the Louisiana Supreme Court has determined a... -
CA: Bay Area Community Services (BACS) is hiring
Source: bayareacs.org The California-based Bay Area Community Services (BACS) is looking to expand our services in...
Any changes with the California’ s Tiered laws?
Concerning the case of Jeffrey Epstein, there is an interesting Youtube video with Rep. Katherine Clark questioning US Attorney Alan Acosta who is under fire for giving a clearly biased and favored plea deal to his friend. When Clark asks him how he could give such a lenient sentence to a man who violated multiple children he says the sentence wasn’t so lenient that he received some jail time, but he also had to register as a sex offender, and the world will know of his past. So here we have a United States Attorney openly admitting that the registry is a serious form of punishment, that it was such severe punishment that it justified his lenient work furlough jail sentence. And Kudos to Katherine Clark she rips this slimy corrupt US attorney apart. I can only imagine how many mandatory minimum sentences he upheld for simple CP cases. I bet there are still people wasting away in prison who went before him for non-contact offenses.
So, I haven’t had to register for nearly 3 years. I was never convicted in Utah nor do I have any civil judgement in Utah for criminal fines or fees. My liability for the annual Sex Offender Registry Fee is however over three years past, it was created by statute and not criminal proceedings. Well, I’ve never paid it, and went on a mission to ensure I skewed my W-4 form enough that I always had to pay taxes. Well, with the Trump Tax Plan this year, I ended up paying a lot in Federal, but sadly got a State refund. Guess who came knocking? Yes, the Utah Office of State Debt Collection is trying to Garnish my Tax Refund. I have 20 days to request a hearing, even though they denied me such a hearing in 2013 when I disputed the “fees” as expost facto fines. Here is my argument this time:
“Defendant asserts that this July 2019 recovery action is time barred by Utah Code Ann. 78B-2-305(4) for all accounts in dispute stemming from Utah Code Ann. 77-41-111. Utah Code Ann. 78B-2-305(4) states that a three-year statute of limitation applies to, “…a liability created by the statutes of this state, other than for a penalty or forfeiture under the laws of this state, except where in special cases a different limitation is prescribed by the statutes of this state.” The Division of Finance, Office of State Debt Collections is subject to the civil statue-of-limitations pursuant to Utah Code Ann. 78B-2-115, “… the limitations in this chapter apply to actions brought in the name of or for the benefit of the state or other governmental entity the same as to actions by private parties.” (See Exhibit D, Pezely v. Utah OSDC, Civil No. 139920053, RULING AND ORDER, 9/22/14, page 2).
Defendant asserts that because the District Court is the court of review for review hearings pursuant to Utah Code Ann. 63G-4-401 and 63A-3-308, Pezely is mandatory authority for the purposes of stare decisis in the application of the civil statute of limitations upon the Division of Finance, Office of State Debt Collection. Soon after Pezely, the Utah State Legislature Amended 78B-2-115 pursuant to S.B. 136 during the 2015 legislative session (Exhibit E), to address the Pezely court’s ruling and modify the statute so that criminal fines, fees, and restitution were not subject to the civil statute of limitations. However, the Utah State Legislature did not act to reverse the Pezely court’s determination that the civil statute of limitations applies to the Division of Finance, Office of State Debt Collection; therefore, that portion and statutory interpretation of Pezely is binding during this review.
While the liabilities in question have been assessed by the Utah Department of Corrections, they do not stem from any criminal adjudication within the jurisdiction of the State of Utah; therefore, the “criminal fines, fees, and restitution” exemptions under Utah Code Ann. 78B-2-115 do not apply to these liabilities, “created by the statutes of this state, other than for a penalty…” (Utah Code Ann. 78B-2-305(4) and 77-41-111). Furthermore, the State of Utah has painstakingly litigated numerous times that the Utah Sex Offender Registry is a “…nonpunitive measure…ascertainable from the simple fact that the legislature placed the statute in the civil code as opposed to the criminal code.” See, Fedemeer,227 F.3d at 1253 (10th Cir. 2000), Doe v. Shurtleff, 628 F.3d 1217 (10th Cir. 2010). Thus, these liabilities cannot be said to be punitive in nature under the legal rationale and legislative intent of the State of Utah.
The last liability in dispute was delinquent on June 30, 2016. Therefore, all liabilities at dispute here are past the three-year civil statute of limitations pursuant to Utah Code Ann. 78B-2-305(4) and further civil action on these liabilities after June 30, 2019, to include recovery by garnishment, is barred as a matter of law.”
Of course if they argue it is somehow a criminal fee, I added a few pages of arguments as to why that would be expost facto.
CR ~ No need to disclose your county, and I am not sure why Texas would be different than anywhere else. You served your time and should be a “free” person. You are not obligated to answer the door, and you are not obligated to answer any questions. If they keep knocking, you can open the door and tell them you live there, and close it again. Otherwise, I would tell them that you are contacting your lawyer, and that you know your rights. They thrive on people who don’t know their rights. I understand that it creates a great deal of stress. That alone is punishment. Have you reached out to Texas Voices? I think it is a group similar to Janice’s California group. I would ask them for suggestions. When we had a similar compliance check, I contacted the agency who did this and complained. I explained to them that I know we don’t have to answer the door or answer any questions, and they agreed. Just show them that you know the law!
NYPD let convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein skip judge-ordered check-ins
How is it that none of us could go ONE year without checking in and not end up in jail
Sounds like we should all move to New Mexico with Jeffrey.
I think it’s obvious that he’s the poster child for the ineffectiveness of sex offender registries. But some may think it just means that registries should be more strictly enforced and more severe punishment. I don’t know what the eventual public reaction to this will be.
It does seem like law enforcement at every level is implying that his being on the registries was clearly additional punishment. Isn’t that what we have been saying all along?
The New York Times had a good summary today:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/11/us/jeffrey-epstein-house-new-mexico.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Maybe we can get all the presidential candidates on board with this idea! That would be great!
Pete Buttigieg says US should have “right to be forgotten” from internet.
https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/7/12/20690983/pete-buttigieg-2020-right-to-be-forgotten-kara-swisher-recode-decode-data-privacy-gdpr-europe.
End the Registries and allow one’s past to be forgotten.😌 Hey, let a guy dream, will ya??
In my current and continuing digging into Carolene and Chastleton, I’ve stumbled upon something that may make it possible to challenge Smith. Please indulge me a bit, and you fellow armchair JDs are encouraged to play along and offer thoughts and critiques (critiques in particular are helpful).
Anyway, the underlying case is Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway v. Waters (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/294/405/), with the interesting tidbit from it being: “A statute valid as to one set of facts may be invalid as to another. A statute valid when enacted may become invalid by change in the conditions to which it is applied.” My thought with these two sentences is that the first one could maybe be used to attack the data SCOTUS used in Smith (“that set of facts doesn’t apply to me, your Honor, as I was not and am not a recently released violent offender.”) and the second one could be used on the recidivism data itself (“assuming, arguendo, ‘frightening and high’ recidivism existed in 2003, conditions have changed and recidivism is no different than for regular offenders.”)
Adding to that is another more recent case from SCOTUS. In Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/579/15-274/), SCOTUS not only cited the above Nashville Ry. case, but Carolene and Chastelton as well. J. Breyer made some salient points about challenging previously decided cases when facts change. I won’t copy-and-paste the long dicta here, but those interested should consult the case and read through II-A in the Opinion.
Beyond all that, a 10th CCoA case provides some decent citations. Again, it’s too long to paste here, so see: Footnote 8 from Dias v. City and Cnty of Denver (https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/172192/dias-v-city-and-county-of-denver/). One snippet from that footnote is: “a legislative classification must be judged in light of today’s circumstances, and that a classification deemed reasonable at the time of enactment can become quite arbitrary with the passage of time.” If that doesn’t apply to Smith and RC laws, I don’t know what does.
Dang!!! Going to start a Richard L Young Fanclub after reading this decision! Nice win (for those with long-ago convictions) and a slap at the govt., though I’m not sure this will ever get affirmed by the 7th circuit CoA. Kudos to FAC for this post: https://floridaactioncommittee.org/in-great-decision-out-of-indiana/
AJ and other almost-JDs: being in the 7th, and that this digs into right to travel and equal protection, could this be used as a template to file on Wisconsin and their insane law differentiating between those who committed their offense there and those who didn’t? (Statute 301.45)
Short reminder of the issue: if you commit an offense in WI, you may never deregister, even if you move out of state. Annual mail in registration for life, worldwide. BUT: if you commit an offense somewhere else and then move to WI, you only register while there. If you move out of the state again you DO deregister. If that’s not an equal protection horsehockey racket, mixed up with right to travel (though I’m not certain how you’d argue it), I don’t know what is.
And would it be worth filing before this goes through the 7th, or keep my pennies and wait to see what they say??
Does or has anyone followed the blog 5to20.net? It has all but disappeared including his twitter feed. He is currently incarcerated for CP and has been posting for years. I came across it a couple of months ago from a link from another site similar to this one. Caution Click maybe. Anyway it was a great blog. He had about two years yet to go.
Sounds like it could be helpful to gat a COR here in California.
Is ANYONE eligible for that and what’s it cost to get it done?
Hello,
Does anyone know if The Does v Snyder Conference call has been posted yet? I can’t seem to find it anywhere , I have even tried asking Michigan’s ACLU , WAR and MCFJ with no luck so far.
So if anyone knows if it’s been posted, can you please let me know were I can find it, I would really like to listen to it, and find out what is going on with Does v Snyder, Thank you, in advance.
Been looking for this info as well , Hope someone can tell us where we may find the conference call info ?
I just got this email back today from the intern at Michigan’s ACLU and I thought I would post it for who ever is interested.
Bobby: Thank you for your interest in the Doe V Snyder case. I understand your frustration. Government does move slow and the court will probably let it go beyond the Aug 21 deadline if we are making progress. Please understand we are doing our best and hope that with working with the courts and all the stake holders in this matter we will get a better outcome for all the people on the SOR. Please do not contact Miriam as she is very busy and is unable to answer all the emails. And when she does answer emails it is taking away from her valuable time that she could be spending on legal issues for this case and others. You are free to contact me at this email address and I will get back to you when I can given all the emails we are getting. As for a recording of the conference call I am not aware that we have one but I will do some checking.
Respectfully Tim P ACLU of Michigan SOR Specialist
Great decision coming out of Supreme Court of MA regarding individualize risk assessment on SO increased tier levels. https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2019/07/17/r12594_1.pdf
CA REAL ID does anyone know if the new REAL ID for CA and other states gets tagged just like Passports for us registered citizens? I understand that soon they will be replacing Passports??
I was removed from Maine states registry in 2010 and I have a relief letter, can I get removed from the SORNA website?
Also, I would like to visit Massachusetts someday do I have to register in Mass?
Did this get some air time here in the forum? I know this is not a new topic overall and has been mentioned before here, but recently? I don’t recall so.
Defense Department Computer Network Among Top Sharers of Child Pornography
https://reason.com/2019/07/03/defense-department-computers-among-top-sharers-of-child-pornography/
Listened to the Michigan conference call.
So from my understanding come August 21st. If the registry is changed to 2,5 and 10 year terms, if I’ve been on for 12 years already I’ll be removed!
Is that a correct understanding?
Here is the Does v Snyder recording, I hope it goes through and works.
https://audio.womenagainstregistry.org/The-Status-and-Potential-Impact-of-the-Does-v.-Snyder-Case-Shelli-Weisberg-Women-Against-Registry-Recorded-July-8-2019?fbclid=IwAR1MKBXT4mHsmqOzbp4sPsopk7X1MAw5YbnHOMQtsnAVJp1Az5iAyrfggmQ
I’m not sure if this story got any coverage here: “Released Sex Offenders Were Three Times as Likely as Other Released Prisoners to be Re-Arrested for a Sex Offense?”
In other words, “How To Lie With Statistics.”
I suspect we will be seeing more such efforts as the data being provided by our allies begins to propagate and pose a threat to the forces of suppression.
https://smnewsnet.com/archives/455512/released-sex-offenders-were-three-times-as-likely-as-other-released-prisoners-to-be-re-arrested-for-a-sex-offense/
just want to throw it out there,sex offender list is b/s as we know ,but any one can go down to the local court house and find about anyones’s past ITS CALLED FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT! I guess some people will go online,instead of getting off their lazy asses to find out
“INVESTIGATORS SAY REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS MUST ABIDE BY 17 LAWS DAILY”
They say that to appease the readers, of course, not out of indignation on behalf of the “sex offenders.”
“Lowndes County Lt. Detective Tony Cooper deals with sex offender registry cases all the time.
“Any violation of these 17 rules could result in a 5-year maximum sentence in the department of corrections,” said Cooper.”
Mississippi, apparently requires the registrant to notify their home jurisdiction if they’re going to be visiting another location, either in-or-out-of-state for more than seven days.
And then there’s this: “Mississippi will soon be switching to a system where the sex offender registry will be printed on the offender’s driver’s license.”
https://www.wcbi.com/investigators-say-registered-sex-offenders-must-abide-17-laws-daily/
“State and local laws push more registered sex offenders into low-income Colorado communities. Data shows disproportionate number of offenders live in impoverished neighborhoods, and community organizers aren’t happy about it.”
Denver used to be such a great town. It was lots of fun. Now, it’s off to an ankle monitor motel on Colfax, no more Brown Palace for you such is the fading of your star! Try not to be seduced by the black tar or the brown powder on your way down. Save that for the very end. Where once you were a sensation at Cheesman Park or Capitol Hill, now you’ve got only a respirator to keep you company and must stop to rest every few breaths. And that goddamned gps! It’s all you can do to keep from ripping it off completely. The only contact you have with people anymore is when you go down to King Soopers to spend your food stamps. Thank Jesus, however, that we aren’t being punished. Now THAT would be intolerable.
https://coloradosun.com/2019/07/24/registered-sex-offenders-low-income-neighborhoods/
My autistic son with mental issues and developmental delay downloaded child pornography and was charged by the state. Despite testimony by his psychiatrist and sexual treatment provider (I started treatment prior to it being ordered – he never was aroused by testing done), the court found him guilty and sentenced him to 3 years probation and put him on the registry for 10 years. My husband literally begged his place of employment to keep him on (it was computer services) and he was allowed to keep the job. He never downloaded anything at work. He moved on to another full time job and is working as an IT tech. I am scared to death of what will happen to him when we die as there are no family members who will help him. He has resided with us since his conviction in 2013. MY QUESTION IS re: background checks. He is applying for a job at the university where he worked before and the background check has been horrendous. He violated his probation and received another 6 months or year (I can’t remember.) When a background check is done does the prospective employer receive actual copies of the court documents and Adult Parole and Probation documents which made the recommendations for punishment (the judge did not put him in jail for 4 months despite their recommendations.) The probation documents contain at least 12 references to the type of images he downloaded and they are not good. Autistic individuals compulsively collect the porn files so I don’t know if he even looked at these files. Does the employer receive actual copies of the court documents, including the documents with the sexually related files? We gave the employer copies letters from his care providers, including his psych MDs explaining his behavior. I doubt he will get the job. Can you help someone help me with these questions. Also should hire a company and do our own background check report? Also I hate the system, all of it now.
Thank you