ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: September 21 Phone Meeting Recording Uploaded
Upcoming:
Oct 19 – LA, Nov 16 – Sacramento, Dec 14 – Phone | details

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

National

AK: Without guidance, Alaska judges to ‘muddle through’ sex offender registry removal decisions

[ktuu.com – 8/9/19]

ANCHORAGE (KTUU) – Without guidance, Alaska Superior Court judges will have to “muddle their way through” decisions over how a person can apply to be removed from the sex offender registry, says John Skidmore, the director of the criminal division with the Department of Law.

In June, the Alaska Supreme Court determined that people on the sex offender registry had a right to due process, effectively meaning they could apply to be removed from the registry if they can prove they are no longer dangerous.

Currently, there are roughly 3,500 Alaskans on the registry. Depending on the severity of the crime or past criminal history, some people are on the registry for 15 years, some for life.

Skidmore says prior to the decision, there was no legal basis for someone to apply to be removed from the registry. Now, the right is in place — but there is no clear framework for how the process would operate.

Anchorage attorney Darryl Thompson, representing his client referred to only as John Doe in court documents, has spent 25 years arguing cases over the constitutionality of the Alaska Sex Offender Registry Act (ASORA).

“A core piece of this is the fact that by doing this is, we’re undermining their ability to rehabilitate,” said Thompson on the sex offender registry. “People can’t get from underneath it.”

Read more

 

Join the discussion

  1. NorthEastPENN

    “Now, the right is in place — but there is no clear framework for how the process would operate.”

    Odd – there is always clear framework for how to be PUT ON the registry though; every “T” crossed and “I” dotted.

    • AJ

      What’s even sadder about that comment is that the guy thinks it’s only “now” that the right is in place. It was there all along and everyone ignored it until now. That’s the weakness of our political system: laws can get passed in minutes that steamroll explicit rights, and then it takes years to fight to get them back–and even then, the State scratches its head about it all. That exact scenario has been playing out in MI for 3 years already. Clear violation of rights, yet for the life of the, the MI legislators can’t (won’t?) figure out how to give citizens back their rights. Shamefully incompetent…or perhaps it’s simply malice.

  2. Eric

    Attorney Daryl Thomson has been has spent 25 years arguing cases over the constitutionality of the Alaska Sex Offender Registry Act (ASORA). Wow! I would like to learn more about this guy. He has been fighting for us for a good part of his life.

  3. Tim in WI

    That a regime began without substantive due process afforded to those already convicted spoke to the regime’s underlying intent. If the constitutional prohibition had been upheld by their leadership from SCOTUS fewer problems would exist for judges today. The presumption of congressional deference by the Rehnquist court when faced with the words ” A person who was in prison for….. ” in statute was incredibly one-sided, and the minority said so.
    Today RBG could not call it ” a close case. ” is it any wonder the people have lost faith in leadership. Senator McConnell is suffering posted online attack threats, do I feel bad for him? No! He can blame his own leadership. When gov attacks it citizens via SOR it paved the way.

    • Eric

      Tim, that is an interesting thought that the registry was the precursor to constitutional violations of all sorts. We are seeing censorship on social media, we see outrageous aberrations of justice from the Jussie Smollet case to the original Epsteing case. Also, with illegal immigration, I sympathize with all people struggling, but that isn’t cause for compromising the law. I was given zero sympathy when I went to court. I had to give up my beloved pets, and I lost my vehicle, my career, life savings and reputation. I broke the law and paid consequences in full with not a single bit of sympathy. But it seems clear that isn’t the case for everyone. Also, the Patriot act came in force to violate our privacy (which I am a casualty of that), and now it appears this new “enhanced background checks” to spot “red flags” will be just like the patriot act that was supposed to search for terrorists, but they ended looking for more sinners than terrorists. Yes, so McConnell is feeling the pinch, and I’m sure many more will as this vagueness of constitutional rights grows even more obscure.

      • Tim in Wi

        Eric,
        None expects sympathy nor should they, wrong is wrong so long as it’s your own wrongdoing and not the wrongdoing of others. Identity politics thrives on propaganda.
        Complaining to Federal courts has limitations even upon writ of Mandamus. Some think it’s to politics of the people preventing congressional repeal. I think they’re hard up against the surveillance saints. Why? To limit gov use of the state’s machines defaults federal use too.

  4. Dustin

    The two problems I have with the Alaska Supreme Court’s ruling are:

    1) It burdens the registrant to prove the negative – that he is not a threat and should come off the registry. I figure the burden of proof should be on the state to prove he is and should remain registered. Of course, neither changes the fact that the registry doesn’t protect anyone from anything.

    2) No superior court judge – an elected position, subjecting rulings based on politics, image, and electability as opposed to law, precedent, and plain old fairness – wants to be the first to release someone from the registry, regardless of circumstance. The only hope a registrant (or one accused of a sex crime) has for a favorable ruling in those courts is if the judge is retiring or has been appointed to a seat on a state appellate court or a federal one.

    • Tim

      Yes, you write of the impossible nature of proving a negative. Burton of proof beyond or other than the ” reasonable doubt” standard is absurd. Judge Mastch stated that quandary too! In reality they’re just fumbling the ball.

      Elected judges are the reality, but lack of good interested council is another. Too many throw arrows at the wrong target. Good lawyers must attack the database of its particular use. It is the usefulness of the indenture in question, it’s efficacy and efficiency. Safety regimes are fine only if the effect renders a general positive contribution to something other than ” to assist LEO. ” Preventing interpersonal attack cannot be done by database broadcasts law without first imposing affirmative restraint in any scenario. Truth is the authorities know that fact this they moved to get FB to ban via TOS. This is not an affirmative restraint by law therefore big gov& big data must be colluding in some channels.

  5. Greg

    Is there a way for California to get on board with that? Right to privacy? Sounds good

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *

.