ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Nov 16 – Sacramento, Dec 14 – Phone | details (2020 Dates added)

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

General News

General Comments November 2019

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of November 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.

Join the discussion

  1. Lake County

    It cost $1.5 million for a chance to win a case in the Supreme Court. If we ever want to get the Supreme Court to revisit the constitutionality of the current registry, we need to start collecting funds now. This cost can go higher or lower depending on our path to get to SCOTUS. But we sure don’t want to cut any corners along the way there since one mistake will hurt us for decades.

    Washington Post:

    • SR

      “… and justice for all… with deep wallets.”

      Our justice system is a joke considering that in practice it only really works for the wealthy.

  2. David

    ACSOL is already on my When-I-win-the-Lottery list. In the meantime, I will continue my automatic monthly donation. 😊
    Please consider doing the same. 👍

    • Lake County

      Continued donations are needed for the current work Janice is doing. However I think we need a fund set up now just for taking a case to SCOTUS in the future. It will take us years to collect enough money when the right case with the right plaintiffs appears. Thanks to the registry, we are mostly a poor group of people, so we shouldn’t expect enough funds to come quickly. We already have great attorneys on our side, but the costs are still great to do this properly. I don’t expect the ACLU to offer much funding, if any.

      • David Higham

        I agree we do need to step up and start fighting back if we set up a fund to challenge the retroactivity of the Adam Walsh act would be a big blow to the registry Neil gorush of the supreme court said after the Hindu case that he could not wait for a case about retiring laws to come before the court again I think that time has come you are right we are a small poor group but there is people on the registry who are wealthy and it is time for them to step up just remember the registry affects us all so let’s bring the fight right at the government it’s time

    • David

      ❗❗❗❗And we need much more outreach!!! There are 100,000+ Registrants in CA alone, more than million nationwide! We must start engaging in more outreach efforts!! ❗❗❗❗

      • Roger H

        @David, I agree completely. I HAVE A CHALLENGE FOR ALL OF YOU: are you willing to spend just a few hours each month to expand our network, which increases people getting informed and involved, which increases our political power, which helps positive change?

        And this idea isn’t just theoretical. Janice and I tried this idea and it worked!

        If your answer is no, don’t expect our network to grow and for change to come much more slooooowly.

        If your answer is yes, then once per month take a non-offender woman with you to meet the registrants in your area andhave her tell them about ACSOL. She can look at the Megan’s website legally to make a list of a few more people to visit. Only about 1 out of 4 will be home and answer.

        Having a non-offender woman lowers people’s guards enough to at least hear what she has to say for 15 seconds. She should do the initial talking, not the registrant. After she quickly explains ACSOL’s goals and accomplishments, either of you can answer questions.

        When done, give them a piece of paper with our website written on it, and maybe a printout of our “About Us” page. Mention our meeting schedule is available by clicking the link at the top of every page.

        This is how civil rights have been won by other groups! Just sitting at home and typing comments on websites is not enough.

        Who accepts my challenge????????

        • R M

          @Roger : At this years Halloween “mandatory meeting” on Halloween in Ga, I printed out, brought with me, and tried to hand out flyers advertising 4 different groups (including ACSOL) advocating for reform. The audience was not receptive. I had 50 flyers….. not 1 accepted… they were more interested in getting out of there and getting home. I did not think they would, as most were disruptive and unruly during the meeting… which mostly entailed watching a movie while being forcibly detained for 3 hours. No, I didn’t have a non-offender woman with me.

          I also contacted another group I was advocating for on that list for their permission to print out some of their statistics twice… I got no response.

        • Roger H

          @RM, you proved my point that we must visit people at their homes. They respond far differently in groups, especially mandatory meetings with cops around. I would have also wanted to get out of that meeting quickly.

          But at home–away from the crowds and cops–registrants will be more open to hear what you have to say. Even if only one in a few listens, you will make progress.

        • R M

          @Roger: Visiting people at their homes is a very scary thing for me. I am me, no one else. I try to invite people into a conversation via personal contacts yet my personality has been dictated by 17 years of being “”as if on parole” by my state of conviction” (read that as being on parole).

        • Mike

          I’m going to be honest with you. I’ve visited this group (along with the previous name) intermittently for many years. I never stay long, though. Every time I’m here it’s constantly negative. Every comment thread is full of people bitching and moaning about how unfair their life is and how everything is terrible and how everyone who doesn’t agree with them are terrorists, etc. Occasionally Janice has a really good post and I like seeing all of the progress she’s made, but invariably the comments will be about how she hasn’t done enough. If she does something that benefits 95% of people, the comments are always “What about the 5!?” Frankly, a toxic environment like this is a hard place for me to stomach more than a few times a year and I certainly wouldn’t encourage others to come here. I think that if we want to expand our scope we need to work on some of the toxicity that pervades the group. Probably not what you wanted to share, but just wanted to give you some of my reasons for not participating in directing people here.

        • kind of living

          Mike To damn bad , I don’t remember you doing my time “For Me ” Or anyone else , mine was 30 + years ago , sorry I don,t always sound positive along with a few others , but we have concern’s about this slow unjust system , mind you its like torcher each day one wakes up, that don’t mean we don’t apricate our Janice or anyone else , so get over it the snowflakes are cluttering ,we have all done some bleeding on this form , yet here you are sniveling about the sniveling and you just cant bare to watch , sound’s like an excuse to bury your head in the sand , I will tell you what is negative and that’s the Fact that we are still slaves under this registry and many are hunted every day by some witch hunter hoping they can put us back in prison regardless how long its been , Or just assault us or kill us , and nobody knows when its coming

        • mike

          Yeah, exactly. You’re entitled to your views on things, and your claims that you’re a slave who is being hunted and tortured. But, don’t be surprised when this little community doesn’t grow beyond people who feel that way. There are plenty of people out there with good jobs, good relationships, good lives, and even good relationships with law enforcement who have better things to do than spend time listening to people whine about their plight. To the extent that we can make a difference, whether through activism, financial contributions, etc., we should do that. But, let’s not pretend that message board rants are the same as actual activism. I’m sorry that your first 30 years removed from your crime has been bad. I’m hopeful that a combination of a mindshift and a legal shift will help your next 30 yearsa.

        • Will Allen


          There is plenty that goes on at this website that has nothing to do with “whining”. And there is nothing wrong with being negative, if that is reality. You could probably use this website to be more informed and just skip over things you don’t want to read that trigger you.

          I expect this is a “little community” because people are just way too lazy and weak to get involved. Maybe they don’t like how other people act and can’t deal with it? If you look at what happened with when “R M” simply tried to hand out some materials at people who were forced to go to a government building for an idiotic reason, I think you can see the real, actual problem right there. He said that not a single person took a flyer he was attempting to hand out and “they were more interested in getting out of there and getting home”. I mean, if I were there I don’t think it would be possible for me to not be very interested in pretty much anything that someone was handing out. I would simply have to read it, even if I thought that it might be the dumbest thing on the planet. So I think we see exactly where the real problem is.

          I feel like most people who are Registered aren’t the brightest, most active bunch of people and they are more interested in trying to live the easiest life that they can. They are beaten down like whipped down and are more interested in not making waves and having “good relationships with law enforcement”.

          And speaking of which, I’m not going to have any relationships with law enforcement. They have nothing to give me and aren’t going to be part of my life. One of the casualties of the Registries must be law enforcement. It just has to be. As long as Registries exist, they will suffer. Personally, I’ve done a great job of costing them non-stop. I want to keep them broke, dysfunctional, and less effective because then they have to work at actual law enforcement problems, instead of jacking off with their Registries. It works.

      • David

        @ Roger H: I would LOVE to start pairing with someone to do knock-n-talks to outreach more folks. Building our numbers is critical to success. We’ve seen the successes that a hundred of us visiting the State legislature can achieve…. Let’s see what 200 of us can accomplish!

        • David

          @R M: Thanks for your comment and thanks for trying to spread the word at the sheriff’s Halloween registrant rally. Try not to be disheartened.
          (I live in a city of 140,000 people, but even the most contentious, well-publicized issues only get about 30-50 people showing up at City Council to speak their mind. That’s about .03% who give a damn enough to take a stand.) A big part of our mission has to be education and encouragement. Again, thank you for your efforts.

  3. James I (PSA--Impt)

    Public Service Announcement

    Please note that everything I write below, my conclusions and how I handled this may be entirely incorrect…please feel free to disregard this narrative because your situation may be entirely different….and yet I think it important to take the time to post this as a caution to everyone that is a RSO in California. (I have also spoken to other people in other states that have complained of “Bond,” type scams making the rounds in their jurisdictions, but I don’t know enough about them to knowledgeably comment about them).

    Be that as it may, I freely admit that I am coward when it comes to any interactions I have with Law Enforcement…I follow the rule repeatedly stated here, Say as little as possible, be polite, but terminate the conversation quickly.

    So, I get a phone call:

    LASD: Hello, this is Sgt XX, Los Angels Country Sheriff’s Dept….am I speaking with YY?

    Me: Yes

    LASD: Address, 123 Elm, Any City, CA, and a registered Sex Offender, Correct?

    Me: Yes

    LASD: There is a problem with your DNA sample and we need a new palm print, there is a recent unsolved crime.

    Me: This is not possible, the national database has years of my palm prints as well as a sample of my DNA

    LASD; No, you are incorrect there, Sir, a Federal Audit has come up with this being not true for you and you will have to come in, meet with me, go into lockup and this should all be processed within a week.

    Me: This is insane, I haven’t got a week to give to anybody, for anything!

    LASD: I’m sorry, but clearing things that have been done incorrectly, takes time

    Me: The LASD is not even my registering agency, I know that City ZZ does things very professionally, I need to go back through them if there is a problem

    LASC: No, they are the problem, Sir, this is a Federal matter and we have been designated as the local agency to fix this problem…you will need to come down to 211 W. Temple to meet with me and be temporarily locked up for hopefully less than a week, there can be posted a performance bond.

    Me: (I know that 211 W. Temple is in fact the main Sheriff’s office…and so this throws me quite a bit) What is your “Name, please spell it,” I ask?

    LASD: Sgt XX….here is a number where you can verify who I am.

    Me: Call me back in 10 minutes.

    (So I call and it is a very professional phone answering tree, though sounding a bit AI’ish, Go here for Records, for emergencies call 911, Sex Offenders, number 4….but none of the lines actually work, all just lead you to an answering machine).

    So I call Los Angeles Sheriff’`s Department Personal Department where you can verify employment (this is the legit number 323-526-5500…a real person always answers), and after I inquire, Sgt. XX is not a Deputy Sheriff…now it is true they will politely give themselves an out making sure I have the correct spelling or maybe I need a missing middle name…but now I am certain this is a scam…and I am angry, (by now you dear reader are probably certain I am insane for putting up with all of this…but I started off telling you I am a coward, so there you have it).

    FakeLASD calls back: You are ready to meet me at 211 W. Temple?

    Me: Yes, you’ll be in uniform? Name badge?

    FakeLASD: Of course, but I will need an open line to you to make sure that you are actually going to 211 W. Hill.

    Me: You mean, like on my cell phone as I drive down there?

    LASD: Yes, exactly…all the way, then I can meet you before booking.

    Me: Well, that’s not possible, I will not keep an open line, but I will meet you there at exactly 4PM today, at the Sheriff’s check in window, you have my picture, so you will know me. I’ll see you there at exactly 4PM.


    I know 211 W. Temple fairly well…I am terrified I am going to be locked up over the weekend, but I also know that if Sgt. XX shows up and doesn’t have impeccable credentials, it will be fairly easy for me to have Him arrested, this is the main criminal courts building and there are few unguarded exits…he will have me, or I will have him.

    My sense is that I have a duty to all the RSO’s in California to bring these scams to a close, if possible…I may be a coward, but I am high on doing my duty, and having arrived early, telling the Sheriff I am a RSO, difficult for me to do in all instances, let alone to LEO…but I do it, and I wait.

    …and I wait.

    And I wait.

    Fake Sgt. XX is a no show.

    Now all of the above may have just been blind luck for me….every situation is different, everyone has to make their own way…but be careful…these thieves that try to prey on us are very good and getting better all the time.

    All of this ruined most of a week for me and left me emotionally exhausted. But if you get a call, be sure to check out who is on the line.

    Good Luck, James I

    • C

      I’m sorry this happened to you. You want to tell these sleaze bags to FO, but hold back just in case it’s legit.

      So, what was the fake cop’s angle here with the open line, redirect you to a WalMart to buy gift cards? What was his end game?
      When they arrested that asshole and his skanky crack whore of a girlfriend a few weeks ago I’d naively thought we’d see the end of such scams for a while. I guess I might as well have stomped a cockroach in the kitchen and thought I’d rid the house of pests when all I’d done was kill the dumbest, slowest bug.

    • Eric Knight

      Actually, the better, less stressful way of handling it would be to report the call as a scam. Keep in mind your ONLY official telephone or non-personal contact with any authorized registry personnel is through your own registry office, so no feds nor their “designated local agency” will be calling you out of sequence.

      This may sound trite, but your registration office may not care about your particular victimization. However, they very MUCH care when someone is IMPERSONATING one of THEIR officers. So ironically, by reporting this the agency would (ostensibly) have more incentive in opening up a case.

      Had this happened to me, and I knew they were going to call me back, I would have gone directly to the nearest law enforcement agency and reported the scam, then waited there so when they called, I could have a real cop monitor my side, and even authorized them to trace the call. While a trace is probably a far-fetched proposal, by doing it in this way you at least give law enforcement the best chance at stopping this.

      Again, the cops don’t give a rat’s about you, but they DO care for their own image, and this is why such a method would have a better chance at working.

    • David

      I got a similar scam call. He identified himself as Sgt. Tate (or Payne, difficult to hear).

    • AJ

      @James I:
      All the other “mistakes” aside, always, always, always ask for a badge number and what precinct or station. Every TBL knows her/his badge number backwards and forwards, and they also all know it’s a unique identifier within their department. (As a similar trick, I ask for employee number or operating initials or “any other unique company identifier” when speaking with Customer Service people and not being sure I’m getting what I need.)

    • mk

      Same thing happened to my hub last year. He called me to tell me about it, and I knew right off its a scam. Hub called the agency the person said they were from and no officer with that name works for them. A few days later they called the house phone, the dude started his stuff and I just yelled at him thru the phone, you are a liar and full of crap. Stop using the registry for your stupid scams. Added a few colorful words and told them do not ever call here again with that crap. Then hung up. They didnt call back. I then called the Sheriff’s dept, and my local Police to report it. They agreed, its a scam. Few days later I saw an announcement on the Sheriff’s fb page about the scam. Apparently they got some gift cards from one person. Look if LE wants to talk to you they are not gonna call. They will either stop by to talk with you or mail a letter, certified.

  4. Bill

    @James I

    As far as scams go it was odd that there was no demand for money or anything tangible that this Sgt. Stedenko could make off with.

    Could be he just wanted to prank you or harrass you for his sick fun. Like he could just video you showing up and waiting like a sucker.

    Or…maybe he just wanted you out of the house so he can plant something there…

    Okay the last one is ridiculous. Anyway, thanks for sharing your experience to our collective knowledge of the Registry.

    • Eric

      Thanks for sharing yet another from the endless list of abuses of the registry. The registry is rapidly becoming a gold mind for every manner of scam, solicitation, and harassment. It is the “easy victim” list everyone miscreant is learning about.

    • C

      Awesome Cheech & Chong reference. I told my kids about Sister Mary Elephant and together, usually on the way to school, love to say,
      “Cla-ass! Cla-ass! SHUUUT UUUUUP! Thank you.”

      Thanks for the chuckle.

  5. Will Allen

    I’ve been giving a significant amount of money to F.A.C. but I’ve stopped for now. Their moderation of comments is just way too random and I feel like very often they are just censoring views that they don’t like. It’s their right to control discussions and have the image that they want for their organization. But I can’t support the censoring/warping of reality to the extent they want.

  6. MidnightMike

    I was reading several of the decisions that have to do with ex post facto as it’s been a major issue here in Michigan. In reading one scotus opinion I saw that they mentioned that in smith v Alaska. The case they always use to say the registry is not punishing people so it can be used retroactively.,,, the opinion mentioned that the court had not factored in technology and how far it might come….as a reason for no longer relying on the Alaska ruling. I thought about that. Im not 100% but I think now have an app for your phone here that can alert you by GPS like as you move about to the proximity to the home/work of a registered sex offender. So like if someone comes into your work,,, or drives by your house,,, blam,,, there is your photo. It’s just a matter of data/gps,,,, and a phone. Before you know it I’m sure they will have the ability to include it in callerID,,,, or what about even being able to identify your cell phones location as being that of a RC???? As tech advances,;, the entire registry becomes the same as putting a sign in your front yard in my opinion,,,, some sort or form of compelled speech which is illegal from the Halloween sign ruling. Like as we advance I could see them passing laws that you have to allow them to use your location if you have a cell phone turned on,,,, Idk. Just a thought and something I’d suggest including in future arguments???? To me it certainly makes being on the list more dangerous as well as more of a disability career/stable home wise. Hopefully someone smarter then me who matters sees this and is able to use the idea….. good luck. Hope to see the lists go away!!!

    • New Person

      Smith v Doe stated that the registry simply “disseminates public information”. The fine print is that a person needs to go to the local PD to look it up. But, yes, technology has blossomed and it has been used as exploitation as well as used in housing, employment and travel decisions.

      Being from California, I often wondered why are some laws neglected? For example, if you were granted probation and earned PC 1203.4, then you earn 3 immunities:
      1) the court “shall” set aside your verdict
      2) the court “shall” thereupon dismiss the accusations or information against the defendant
      3) and except as noted below, “he or she shall” thereafter be released from all penalties and disabilities resulting from the offense of which he or she has been convicted, except as provided in Section 13555 of the Vehicle Code.

      Focus on the second immunity. That information only existed within the PD and nowhere else. In today’s world, that information is still being bandied about through background check for employment, background checks on US military bases, and being shared with the International Megan’s Law (IML). How is it possible that your information is continued to be disseminated when your record is no longer public?

      In this situation, the CA law is superseding Smith v Doe, 2003, by continuing to push any 1203.4 registrant recipient to be part of the “dissemination of public information”. The Smith v Doe judgement gave way to states to run amok as they’ve taken to their own interpretation of the law passed under Smith v Doe. Recall, Smith v Doe opinion stated that the registry did not affect housing, employment, nor travel (registry was via post card). That isn’t not the case today. HUD excludes you if you’re on the registry. Employment will reject you for being on the registry. In-person re-registration is not considered a disability today, but it was in CA in 1958.

      It’s odd to read all these protections not being extended to 1203.4 recipients. It’s like saying, “Hey, you earned this second chance at life… unless you’re a registrant. We’re gonna make life worse for you. That thing you earned like every other convicted who was granted a way to earn the 1203.4, welp, you don’t get all those benefits. You’re on a different program call the Certificate of Rehabilitation, CoR. Not only do you have to prove yourself through your probationary term, but you also have to prove yourself for at least a total of 10 years before we even consider giving you a second chance. That’s right. You have to prove yourself twice! Oh and it isn’t criminal at all, but it’s a crime if you don’t follow our rules.”

    • AJ

      You touch on something I’ve mentioned a time or two on here. Part of the “okay-ness” in Smith was that a citizen had to make an affirmative act to get the information from the State. SCOTUS portrayed this as essentially an e-visit to a courthouse. However now with the apps, etc., there is no affirmative act required beyond downloading an app once. That hardly compares, IMO.

      On a related note, SCOTUS said the information provided on a ML site would allow a person to make a decision on how to protect themselves and their family from the threat of a RC. A marked ID/DL that just says “SEX OFFENDER” doesn’t provide that. IMO and compelled speech aside, this is contrary to Smith. I feel getting marked IDs/DLs struck is probably the lowest-hanging fruit we have. But, it still costs money and time and is probably more than most individuals wish to spend.

  7. blake


  8. Jack

    Hey everybody I just thought I’d share this great news article from Canada with you. And god bless Justin Trudeau! lol. (The conservatives there are the ones that raise the Age of consent to 16 under the harper administration, so we know how they’d feel about this)

  9. NorthEastPENN

    Another newspaper article to stir up fear (Let’s play a game – How many suspicious inconsistencies and omissions can you find in this recent newspaper article?). You may want to read it a few times in order to grab all that makes no sense. The article is only about six short paragraphs in length.

    Article Titled –
    “Man charged with luring 3-year-old girl into van”
    Here is the link –>

    “According to the caller, a black male driver in a silver ford Van with New Jersey registration had just asked a mother and her 3-year-old daughter if they wanted to come inside the van and pet their puppy” Title does not mention the mother. Also later in the article the driver of the van asked the daughter if she wanted to get into the van to pet the puppy; no mention of asking the mother.

    “a black male driver in a silver ford Van”
    Later in the article the van mysteriously changed into a car “Two passengers in the car were also identified.”

    “Two passengers in the car were also identified.”
    The van which turned into a car had two additional passengers in it. The driver of the van I guess decided prior to attempting to lure the 3 year old said to himself – “Let me be sure I bring two witnesses with me who can testify against me in court that I did commit this crime”. Maybe Udeke was with his family members waiting on someone in the store to come back to the van. I know I have sat in parking lots while someone with me ran into the store for something.

    “She reported that she and her two daughters and husband had pulled into a parking spot next to the silver van. ”
    Can some one please tell me where her other daughter and husband disappeared to during all this?

    “As she got out of her vehicle, the van’s window rolled down, and Udeke asked her for a cigarette. She gave him one.”
    Ah, maybe Udeke was just having a friendly casual conversation with the mother as she was removing her child from the van. I know I have made conversation with people near me in parking lots. Maybe I will give that a second thought in the future.

    “As she was getting her 3-year-old daughter out of their car, Udeke asked the daughter if she wanted to see the puppy in the back of his van, according to police. ”
    Something just does not strike me as truthful here. Again where was the husband and the other daughter at this moment? He asked the daughter if she wanted to see the puppy in the back of the van? I don’t think he said “do you want to come into the back of the van and see the puppy”.

    “The reported victim and her mother then went to an area store, where York County 911 was called.”
    So either it did not dawn on the mother that there was an attempted luring of her child at that moment but then later gave it some thought and said maybe there was? Why didn’t she just pull out her cell phone and call 911 right at the scene since her daughter was in so much danger of abduction and so that the van had no time to get away. Also, I thought the mother and daughter were in the parking lot of the retail store, so what other retail store did they go to?

    “An officer conducted a traffic stop at the scene.”
    If this guy Udeke had just knowingly attempted to lure this child and or mother into his van way in the world would he stick around waiting for the police to arrive? And I am sure the mother must have made some type of stink to Udeke when he asked her daughter to come in the van. Wait but Udeke did not ask the child to come into the van just to the back of the van.

    “Udeke was arrested. He is charged with luring a child into a motor vehicle or structure.”
    This is a strong lesson to all adults out there – “Don’t talk to strangers!!”

    “The mother was able to positively identify Udeke as the driver of the van and the person who asked her daughter to come inside the van.” How could the mother give a positive identification of the driver of the van if she was so inconsistent with the rest of what took place.

    If you were a judge presiding over this case and were given these facts how would you respond to it? If you were the prosecutor in this area would you even take on this case for fear of embarrassment?

    I am sure some of you can pick out even more inaccuracies or inconsistencies than I listed but I am only on my first cup of coffee this morning and not quite awake yet.

  10. TR

    I wonder when the IML got passed, if there really was any danger of child sex trafficking and sex tourism that’s so great that the IML needed to be passed. It seems that when the law took effect, that there would be posters about sex trafficking prevention at any airport international arrival areas trying to raise awareness to everyone. When a traveler is identified as a registrant at immigrations from the alerts sent out by our government, they are detained and questioned as if they fit the description of the suspect they’ve been searching for, then processed on a return flight, calling it a victory. The denial of entry into a foreign country from the alerts being sent out by our government is the result from the notification process that registrants have to do by federal law if they plan to travel internationally. Foreign governments have their own laws that can deal with the matter of trafficking and other crimes, what makes our government so special that other countries like in Latin America will comply with the US?, if that person is traveling for the purpose to commit a crime they’re gonna get caught, and if not in most cases, even if a person has a criminal record who is traveling legitimately, will stay out of trouble and be safe in whatever country they are in.

  11. R M

    Tonight I ordered food via Door dash. The delivery man delivered my order. He had no clue what awaited him (yeah, it could have been a she as it has before).

    He knocked.
    I answered
    Here’s your order.
    Thank you. (tip/delivery fee already paid mind you)
    He seemed like a nice guy, so I asked him… “Hey, what’s the 1st amendment. I got money in my pocket if you can answer that.”
    He stumbled about a bit and got 3 of the 5. Speech, press, assembly, religion, petition.
    I gave him all the cash in my pocket…. he got 3 of the 5 1st amendment issues right….. that’s more than 99% of the carbon breathing morons digging holes on this soil can fathom.
    I invited him back for future chats. Let’s see if he returns.

    • AJ

      @R M:
      Let me guess, he missed petition and assembly. What made you ask him this and what was your point?

  12. Looking for answers

    There was an article on mercury news that talked about criminal cops who were still on the job, and yet some in our community have a hard time finding or keeping jobs. It was called California’s Criminal Cops on mercury news. Might be worth a look if you’re interested. You can search by department.

  13. Living abroad

    I would like to send a “Thank you and thinking of you” on this day to all the Veterans that suffered through so much defending those who now spit on your names. You protected their right to do so, not knowing it would be your downfall. I did the same. If I had the choice to do it again, I would. Because the people I worked and fought beside were, and are, the best people America could ask for to give their lives. To the families of the fallen, stand proud!

  14. Mike G

    Also scammed.

    Sorry I’m a late with this, but I also fell for a scam very similar to that reported by James I about a week ago.
    The caller claimed to be an officer with the Fresno County Sheriff’s department (which is my reporting agency).
    Instead of a DNA problem, this officer claimed that I had failed to appear to testify as I had promised, and a warrant had been issued for my arrest. Of course, I had no clue what he was talking about, but he sounded very official. He said that if I would meet him at the Sheriff’s office (he gave me the correct address), he would accept a bond payment to squash the arrest warrant. I set out for the Sheriff’s department (he insisted that I be in constant cell phone contact during my trip). About 2/3s of the way there (25 minute drive for me), he said that he now needed to meet me at another location near the Sheriff’s office. This finally raised my suspicions that something was fishy, so I told him I was going to the Sheriff’s office, and he could meet me there. He said that this would cause problems for me, and I said that I would have to deal with that when it happened. I was almost there by now, so I said “I’ll see you there” and hung up on him. As with James I, he never showed up, though I still was in a state of concern for a few days. Also, like James I, I am fairly cowardly when dealing with law enforcement.

    Note: The caller ID on the call said “Fresno County Sheriff” (otherwise I wouldn’t have answered it), and the number was the correct number for the department. The caller sounded confident, convincing, and believable right to the end.

    Note 2: About two weeks after the call, I received another similar call. As soon as he got to the part about a warrant had been issued, I said “So come and get me!”, and then hung up on him. I didn’t lose much sleep after that one.

    • soemone who cares

      Here in Orange County, you can look up arrest warrants online, and if there truly was one, it would show.

    • AJ

      @Mike g, et al:
      If they have a warrant and know where you live, they’ll just come get you. TLs get a high executing warrants, there’s no way they’ll let you steal the thrill, nor would they be that kind to someone they view as a criminal (thus the warrant). If it were instead a Summons, it would come by mail.

      Rule of thumb regarding government entities is they like everything in writing and typically have neither the time nor initiative to make phone calls. It’s much easier to whip up some form letter and let the “machine” spit it out.

  15. Rojani Smith

    I have a school aged children, one has ASD. As I fight for my child against the school system authorities are being called on us by anonymous callers coincidentally within a week after a heated school meeting as I hold them accountable for not doing their job and dropping the ball. First, CPS was called on us and recently someone had made an anonymous call and reported my husband to the authorities as he waiting across the street from the school yard to pick up our children. My fear is that if someone had made this anonymous call from the school, it is possible for this to spread and affect our children, and our child who has ASD to be discriminated. My gut tells me that someone is not happy with how I’m fighting for our child and in retaliation committing horrible things to our family. I don’t know what to do, please help. What are my legal rights? How can we protect our children from discrimination, harassment, and bullies?

    • Bill

      @Rhojani Smith

      Being somewhat new to the Registry I have no clear cut answers to offer you in regards to your dilemma but I totally emphathize with you.

      Perhaps our ragtag community here can offer some advice or personal insights to help you and your family cope with this situation.

      Depending on what state you’re from someone can offer information to an advocacy group that give you legal advice that suits your county. Maybe Janice can point you to the right direction…

      That being said your situation is not entirely unique. I’ve encountered a few Registrants that has suffered by the hands of an ignorant community. And if their stories have taught me anything it is this:

      There are forces outside our control that we cannot do anything about and I’m not talking about laws or policies…

      Ignorance, fear, and hate permeates everywhere around us in various degrees from your unsatisfied housewife to angry nationalists that wants to inflict violence to their minority of choice.

      And when the Registry’s information finds its way to the ignorant, fearful, and hateful it becomes weaponized inflicting needless pain and suffering to the Registrants, their loved ones, and worst of all to their children.

      The battle against these policies is going to be long-term so no instant relief for awhile.

      The battle against ignorance, fear, and hate at the Registrants is going to be even longer, perhaps never going to end…

      But how we CHOOSE to cope during these tumultuous times is the only power we truly possess.

      If we choose resilience in the face of adversity then we must develop a healthy mindset of our own self-worth regardless of what comes our way.

      Teach your child self-worth. Help him/her develop a healthy self image that cannot be torn down by bullying. Give him/her mental tools to cope with adversity.

      Teach him/her mental and physical Kung Fu to deflect the fear and hate whenever they manifest.

      Do this by seeking out self-help and self-empowerment books by people you admire. Find shining examples of people that have overcome adversity.

      You cannot be there 24/7 to deflect all his/her challenges but you can empower with mental tools, self-worth, and resilience in the face of adversity.

      You know what I do to lift my spirits and still feel good even during a crappy day?

      I watch the Martian. I watch Shawshank Redemption. Movies about overcoming adversity. May not be for you but it works for me.

      So I’m not sure how helpful that was but it is what I can offer you.

  16. TP

    Has anyone here ever thought about contacting someone like John Oliver or Adam from Adam ruins everything to see if they’d do a segment on the truth about Registries and all that jazz?

    Or written an OpEd and submitted it to the big news papers like NY Times, LA times etc?

  17. SR

    Just heard on NPR that a federal judge ruled that having your digital devices searched at ports of entry is illegal without reasonable suspicion. Though she didn’t rule to have it stop (probably because she expects and appeal).

    It’ll be interesting if this actually changes the law and how it’ll apply to RC’s. I’m guessing we’ll be exempt from this ruling, but I see that as a positive as it’ll add another thing to the list to fight against the registry.

    • TS


      Exempting those on the registry from this would be an equal protection issue because what is good for the goose is good for the gander, e.g. jury selection exclusion.

  18. AJ

    While recently reviewing some RC cases and case law, I stumbled across something that seems quite off. In Doe v. Tilley (E.D. Ky. 2017; the Order starts out by saying:
    John Doe is a registered sex offender. As such, he is bound by the numerous requirements set forth in Kentucky’s Sex Offender Registration Act, which seeks to govern where Doe lives, works, recreates, and more.

    While none of that is exactly new to anyone on here, let’s take a look at Smith v. Doe (538 US 84, 87 (2003)):
    The holding that the registration system is parallel to probation or supervised release is rejected because, in contrast to probationers and supervised releasees, offenders subject to the Act are free to move
    where they wish and to live and work as other citizens, with no supervision.

    Hmmm….SCOTUS says we’re free to “live and work as other citizens” and yet the District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky says the Commonwealth’s law “govern[s] where [RCs] live[], work[], recreate[], and more.” (I wonder just what “and more” entails.)

    I sure wish SOME courts other than the 6th CCoA and PA SC would see how far off Smith the laws have gone. I also wish those courts would take heed of the parenthetical in Packingham where SCOTUS mentioned “the troubling fact that [NC’s] law imposes severe restrictions on persons who already have served their sentence and are no longer subject to the supervision of the criminal justice system[.]”

    This just seems so ripe for attack. Hopefully there’s an unknown case out there wending its way through on this basis.

    • TS


      I hope you’re keeping these points logged you bring up. They’re excellent for reference.

      • AJ

        Nope. I’m a brain-stormer and leave details to others unless I feel compelled to or must take up the baton myself. Currently, neither applies. That said, all these little tidbits do stay lodged in my grey matter.

    • New Person

      While none of that is exactly new to anyone on here, let’s take a look at Smith v. Doe (538 US 84, 87 (2003)):
      The holding that the registration system is parallel to probation or supervised release is rejected because, in contrast to probationers and supervised releasees, offenders subject to the Act are free to move
      where they wish and to live and work as other citizens, with no supervision.

      Wait. Does that mean compliance checks serve as “supervision” on where one lives or works?

      • Bo

        The words you are you need to be looked up in a legal dictionary. For example, postrelease supervision (1938) Criminal procedure. In some jurisdictions, a part of a criminal sentence whereby a felon serving a determinate sentence is required to undergo a specified period of police monitoring after the completion of a prison term.
        So, it’s not likely it would be a legal argument to call it the above supervision.

  19. JohnDoeUtah

    Little update on my case regarding the registry fees.

    The State argued that it was not personally served, so service was ineffective, moved to quash the summons. They provided a signed statement and copy of the envelope in which I mailed the Summons and Complaint indicating receipt.

    I responded by highlighting the section of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure that state service of Complaint and Summon by mail to the state is acceptable as long as the recipient, “signs a document indicating receipt.” The sworn statement of that state’s counsel does just that.

    ——— this one has upset me ———–

    They filed an Opposition to my request to proceed under pseudonym, and didn’t serve me with it, then asked for a decision. I responded with an Objection with a copy of the envelop I received the day they indicated, which only included an Appearance of Counsel on part of the state (postage was $0.50 their opposition would have required more postage).

    I put a lot into the Motion, but these are debt collection attorneys for the state, so they play dirty. I have legal custody of the child born on my crimes and my “victim” and I are very close friends and spend a lot of time together (been 15 years since). If they unmask me I would likely lose my job and my son, a relative victim, could be subject to the abuses of the public. Not to mention the public spot light that will be put on my victim. We have many friends and acquaintances who do not know about the past, it is our family business, and any mention of my name will tie directly to her as being a victim of sexual abuse.

    So, I have requested a hearing and raised an Objection. In the two lawsuits from 10 years ago none of the State’s attorneys tried to unmask my identity in the lawsuits, but this one is a piece of work. Nothing like debt collection attorneys.

    • Will Allen

      Are there any moral, legitimate reasons why you should not be allowed anonymity? I can’t personally think of any, but maybe someone has heard of some for this? Did the criminal regime give any reasons?

      If there are not, then what are we to think of any government that attempts such a thing? What are good, moral people to think of governments that would attempt to unmask someone for no legitimate purpose? I would think that they are a criminal regime, just as I expect.

      And what kind of legitimate government is afraid to litigate any position it has? What kind of legitimate government would attempt to kill any litigation just based on a technicality? You would think that a legitimate government would welcome litigation and any opportunity to make laws more or less solid.

      But governments that have Registries aren’t legitimate. They aren’t moral or legal either.

      We all need to know that when we are dealing with Registry supporters that we are dealing with criminal terrorists. Never cede anything to the criminals.

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 *