ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule

General CommentsGeneral News

General Comments December 2019

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

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

What has been the experience with getting hired by an employer after you have been given an offer letter…tell them before or after the background check about your history? I’ve been made a great conditional offer but there’s a background check. My conviction is thirteen years old but I’m on the hit list. I live in Orange County, CA (Southern California) and I’ll mainly work from or out of my home with trips to client offices (the main office is in Northern California so technically my employment would be Northern California). This job is double what I currently earn and I’m qualified. Since “ban-the-box” has anyone had the opportunity to respond to a disqualifying letter and been successful? Any ideas here? I know it’s easy to be negative but I refuse to live in a bubble. I’ve worked for my current company almost ten years and the owner knows about my situation and doesn’t care….but he also treats me like an animal. Any positive suggestions?

Here’s my advice:
1. Know your story. Don’t lie, but don’t disadvantage yourself either. Plan ahead (even write down and memorize) what it is you are going to say. Know what points you want to make: “it was 13 years ago and no trouble at all since that time”; “10 solid years with your current employer” (shows stability, commitment, serious work ethic, etc.), maybe emphasize that you’ve paid for your mistakes and you’re working hard to be a valuable, contributing member of society. I like to think people are generally good and would like to help out if you can present them with a comfortable, safe option, because his/her reputation may be on the line. Hopefully, you can present your situation and what happened in a sympathetic way, so they can feel good about giving you a chance.
2. Practice delivering your story, your “speech”. In a mirror, just to yourself, or to a friend/family member. Be sure to practice so you will remember your most important points and you won’t “choke”.
3. Prepare for the response you’ll get with three scenarios in mind: (1) Best Case response, (2) Most Likely Case response, and (3) Worst Case response.
4. Be prepared to answer any questions. Think ahead about what he/she might ask you and prepare honest & fair answers.
5. It’s quite possible that he/she won’t be able to give you an answer and he/she will need to discuss it with management, HR, etc., so be prepared for not getting an immediate answer.
6. Be courteous. Be patient.
Wishing you the best of luck, KWA.

Thanks for the input David. I’m hoping they at least give me the opportunity to have “my say”. Your points are appreciated!


I am putting my responses in your post so I can follow it!

What has been the experience with getting hired by an employer after you have been given an offer letter…tell them before or after the background check about your history?
I wouldn’t say a word. The law has changed in California. If they say they can no longer offer you the job, they must send you something writing telling you the results and why the offense would disqualify you. They can’t just use a board reasoning.

I’ve been made a great conditional offer but there’s a background check. My conviction is thirteen years old but I’m on the hit list. I live in Orange County, CA (Southern California) and I’ll mainly work from or out of my home with trips to client offices (the main office is in Northern California so technically my employment would be Northern California). This job is double what I currently earn and I’m qualified. Since “ban-the-box” has anyone had the opportunity to respond to a disqualifying letter and been successful? Just follow everything to the word of law. You would definitely have a case if they do not follow it.

Any ideas here? I know it’s easy to be negative but I refuse to live in a bubble. I’ve worked for my current company almost ten years and the owner knows about my situation and doesn’t care….but he also treats me like an animal. Any positive suggestions?
I would just follow it like any candidate. The law is in place to protect those with any convictions. Know your rights and follow everything to a T. Even tell them you know that your offense shouldn’t disqualify you as you know about the law. With any claim, the agencies that you would complain to want to know that you did everything in your power to give them a chance to change their mind.

Thanks for the input! Very helpful and appreciated!

I just went through the same thing literally this week. Thank god I got the job I was offered but I had to fight for it. Do not disclose anything!!! They will run your background and in California they can only see 7 years. If the job doesn’t involve direct contact with minors they are not allowed to use the registry at all. CA PC290.46 strictly prohibits this. If they find it, you will be given the opportunity to respond and explain lyourself. I wrote a good letter and got letters from my wife, current employer and some friends who are respected in the community. Fortunately the HR person who I was working with was very cool and we worked it out and my offer was not rescinded Again do not disclose. If you do they can reject your offer. Self disclosure permits them to, as well as if they saw it on your criminal history within 7 years. Since yours is older, the only way they’d know is the registry which is not allowed. Please keep us posted and feel free to reply here if you need help. I’m in OC as well. Good luck.

Thank you so much. This is so encouraging!

Done this many times.

First, a conditional offer is NOT an offer.

Tell them once they complete their check, you’ll be happy to accept their offer.

Do mention they may find things during their check. As another poster mentions, do be ready to explain… If they ask. Generally they don’t ask, either way.

Many companies run only completely legal checks. If your offense is that old, a legal check only goes back seven years. *Technically* searching the registry sites IS illegal… That doesn’t mean you have real recourse if they run an illegal check. They ARE required to give you the results of their check and if you’re denied on the basis of an illegal check… Well, like I said, there isn’t recourse unless you have a ton of money, but it is both a civil rights violation and as I recall a felony to deny employment on the basis of registration.

I had this happen and I got a positive outcome.
1) Always document everything. Never delete those emails/documents. If denied, you need names, dates, and those documents.
2) If they ask for an explanation, but conciliatory, overly so, if you can stand it. Say that you’ve grown, you recognize what you did was wrong, etc.
2) Report it to the dfeh. It will take a 6-12 months for a case to process. You will need to continue the job hunt.
3) Bug the caseworker for the dfeh weekly. And ask for updates.

Do not let an employer walk all over you. On the other hand, in my experience, it’s been about a 25-50% chance that a company will use this illegal practice. But, apply away!

Good luck!

Thanks for the topic. First off – my disclosure policy is on a “need to know” basis – and I think it is always better for an employer to have the opportunity to get to know you as a person and an employee before learning about your charges.
Also – while “Ban the Box” is helpful, in allowing returning citizens to submit applications, it doesn’t keep employers from running standard checks at the time of hiring you. They can choose to make up any reason they want to “eliminate your position.” Although the “7 year rule” sounds nice – the internet and google searches don’t adhere to this 7 year rule – and still can show up on most internet searches – and internet searches don’t discern between hands on or hands off offenses.
These are tough times – we’re in the middle of a Blacklist – and deep misinformation and fear campaign.
That said – when I have been confronted about it – and best case is if this is in person – where you can talk human to human – I have a letter (pre-written) – I also have a reasonable relationship with my po (which a lot of people do NOT have) – and can refer them to her.

Here’s the letter:
In 2011, I ran a small non-profit, owned a house in the city and had a young family. This same year, I was arrested and eventually served a 6 year sentence in federal prison for possession of child pornography on my computer. My life and the life of my family has been forever changed.

Since the time of my arrest, and continuing during my time in prison and since my release, I have become actively involved in a recovery group working on the addiction issues that contributed to my crime. In July 2016, I returned home to my wife and son and have been working to rebuild my relationship with my family and my community. For 2 years I worked with the company launching the _______________ in the _____________. Beginning this summer, I’ve been volunteering with _______________ Job Readiness Program to help people coming out of halfway houses and shelters to re-enter the workforce. I have established a small micro-press called ______________ to publish and distribute magazines and publications.

While my relationship with my family is strong, I have learned first-hand the deep-rooted discrimination that returning citizens encounter – especially for individuals with my charges.
I am part of a growing segment of American people who have a criminal record and are deeply alienated from opportunities, as a result. I understand that looking at child pornography is particularly abhorrent conduct and I have spent 9 years in recovery for this criminal behavior. Within the healing community I have cultivated, it is often people who were abused as children who have given me the most support and encouragement. I find this hopeful and feel a deep obligation to honor their faith in me, with diligent recovery work.

Having lived within prison systems, I don’t believe a person should be defined by their worst mistake. I believe my experience as a successful business person/visual artist and a convicted felon– someone crippled by his addiction who has learned to rebuild his life and his relationships–makes me uniquely qualified to relate to a very diverse group of people and problem-solve a wide array of issues. I have come out of the experience of the last 9 years a stronger person. I believe I have a lot to contribute to our community and would like the opportunity to do so in the workplace.


Thank you for sharing your insights on this matter. It seems that I can relate to lot of points you have brought up.

You mentioned visual artist in your background. Which industry was it in? Graphic arts? Animation? Filmmaking? I’m curious…

KWA…hang in there I was in a similiar situation about 10 years ago for a great job in So Cal for an international company; the long and short is they only went back 7 years for background check and nothing came up of my SO. I worked 7 years for them and retired 18 months ago. Not sure how to find out how far back they go…but hang in there

Thanks for your encouraging words. I think best case scenario they won’t find it, but I know I will show up on “the list”. I think it’s best to wait to see what they uncover before I say a word and then hope I get an opportunity to at least fight for myself. If nothing came up of your SO status, did you feel like you were always looking over your shoulder? Part of me just wants them to know and hope they can deal with it (like the employer I have now). My current employer is a small company and they could care less…this new employer is a big company and I figure they would see it as a liability. I’m staying positive.

Hello there,

Sadly, background companies like HireRight and ChoicePoint LEGALLY and DO use the registry. My husband lost his job after 15 months for being found on the website. Ignore the fact that they are not allowed to use this for Employment or Apartments, etc. THEY DO. They are using it through Third Party Vendors and get away with it. We even personally spoke to one of the attorney’s whom was present at the ACSOL conference, and they can use it. ( They are using loopholes) I always say honesty is the best, but let’s be honest, in big corporations like United Health Care or Kaiser customer service jobs, you WILL NOT BE HIRED if you disclose your background. If it is over 7 years, you are only safe for the conviction, but they are finding many registrants on third party vendors, like USA Children Safe crap, and you will be non-hired. They will use company policy and Risk issues. I know hundreds of registrants whom have lost jobs, been denied, due to Megan’s Law. I wish more lawyers would use this defense and do law suits, but most state they are finding loopholes. Its a 50/50 shot for you. I would say yes be honest if applying to a small/family owned type business. But if it’s a large corporation, you got a long shot. Please keep us updated with what route you chose.
Best of luck!

Do you mind if I ask what they used as an excuse to fire him? Was it company policy and risk as you mentioned? I find it so crazy that someone could work for you for that long and then suddenly they are a risk or liability. It’s not like you lied on an application. So lame.

UPDATE: Got the job…background check did not find the felony. Started working two weeks ago and couldn’t be happier. I did wait to give notice until the background check came back which meant giving notice of only a few days. That didn’t go over to good but I offered to help via telephone if they needed me and that seemed to go a long way. Big concern now is I know they have a school as a client (although I think there is only one among thousands of other clients). I may be called to go work in their front office. Since I’m on lifetime supervision (which I’m hoping to get off of this year), I’m not sure how I can get around that one but I’ll deal with it when I get to it. So far so good. Appreciate everyone’s input. Fingers crossed I don’t get called on to do a school. I can only call out sick so many times.


Congratulations! I’m happy for you! Nothing like a win now and then for Registrants.

How long ago was your case that your employment couldn’t pick up? And how long were you under lifetime supervision before you began petitioning to get off from it? Are you in CA?

Well it’s that time of the year again. Time to snap out of my illusion of normality, of being just like everyone else. Time to go down to the police station and submit to my yearly registration.

I hate it. I hate this month. It makes me anxious, angry, and sad that this has to happen, that this has to intrude on the holiday season with my kids and family.

I don’t know why the law wasn’t set to have your yearly registration date be your conviction date instead of your birthday. That would make it easy and almost guaranteed to never be on a holiday. My birth date is Christmas day. In addition to all the normal holiday stress I have to deal with this.

It also means I have less time than ‘within 5 days of your birthday’. Especially this year with the 25th being on a Wednesday. Within 5 days includes 2 weekends, the 25th itself, and Christmas Eve. Can’t schedule my registration on any of those days.

Also this year I finally got myself back to where I was pre conviction. That makes me even angrier about having to go spend a couple of hours at the police station in the days before Christmas. This BS has to end.

Thanks for listening. This is the only outlet I have to vent. It’s not healthy I know, probably need to see a therapist or something just to deal with being on the registry. No guarantees I can find someone who would be sympathetic though.

I feel for you. Just went to my fiance’s son’s wedding in Vegas. Been there before and registered there before for a four days stay but of course had to ask permission to go again as I ‘m still on a lifetime leash for CP. Even my P.O. says it’s a waste of his time to come out to visit me every month because I’m so low risk…but do you think that will change any time soon? So, I had to fly out early before everyone else to spend half a day in the Police station registering, again. My phone died it took so long and I ended up walking two miles to get to the monorail so I could get back to the hotel to meet up with everyone. It was a black day that’s for sure. And, I was told the only reason they allowed me to go the the wedding was because I had been in Vegas before. So…it took them five hours to re-register me to be there for three days. So incredibly ridiculous. Try to look for positives (and yes I know that seems impossible). We don’t dwell on it. We just incorporate it into our lives as a necessary evil. At least I got to go. It would have sucked to be making up excuses as to why I wasn’t there. If I don’t get this job then at least I know that I’m worth more money and that the treatment I get where I’m at isn’t right. It’s validation. Doesn’t make me want to celebrate but it’s a small victory in its own way. I think you should show up to register with a box of See’s Candy and offer everyone in the Booking office candy in the name of your birthday. At the very least show up with a big smile and tell everyone it’s your birthday. Screw em. Don’t let them take your control.


I have this personal theory that the decision to make appointments during the birth month was NOT done for their convenience or efficiency. But rather it was done out of spite to inflict emotional distress and further torture us psychologically. Same goes for how they make us wait 10-20 minutes in chairs AFTER the designated appointment time. I know fully damn well it’s done intentionally

Never smile, joke or be friendly with them. Ever. They are not your friends. Look through them, not at them. Most of them lack sensitivity training and have an empathy deficit when it comes to us.

In California it is 5 business days. Weekends and holidays don’t count if they are closed.

I feel you.

If you got one, wear a suit. It rattles the hell out of these cops. They want you to be scared, to look like a mess, to look like a criminal.

It is night and day when you present yourself as professionally as you can. It’s a small victory, but a victory nonetheless.

Yeah, this.

Myself, I don’t own any formalwear, but I go in wearing my Sunday best like I’m going to a job interview. Something like business casual. Don’t go in looking like a deadbeat.

I was wondering if the 7 years limit on background check is the same for rentals as I will be looking in long beach year. Any suggestions would help as my conviction misdeameanor is 25 years old.

Hi BA,
I can only speak from personal experience and from working with other registrants in the outreach areas of my work. Many rental properties that are LLC owned, use background companies. They can only go back 7 years, but if you are a registrant, and they are signed up for sex offender checks, they will find you. We have lost 5 apartments in the past 8 years. My husband was never on the lease, but sometimes when you move in, the local residents are signed up to alert a neighbor when a sex offender moves in. BOOM! They are off to the landlord. They will send you a notice that an occupant is not on the lease living there, and to add them to the list. Oh they are sneaky, they know damn well whom the occupant is. But this is there protection. The sticky point is when they run the criminal and if it’s over 7 years, they can’t find you. But these lovely background companies are using third party vendors, not actual Megan’s Law, and finding registrants on the list, and your out. And this needs to stop. But they get away with it. You are best off dealing with a private owner, stay away from apartments with kids, and try to be upfront. This is why there are so many homeless registrants. MEGAN”S LAW! Which we all know does nothing to protect the public, but everything to ruin the registrant and his families life. I wish you well in your search. It’s not easy.

Well have you given thought to buying a mobile home and putting it in a park that’s has older owners or any mobile park that needs to fill a space ?

I had an apartment overturned, but two acceptances!
I was upfront, but did not disclose everything. I just said there was something that happened x amount of years ago and how should I fill out the form. I also gave them a copy of my expungement. The apartment tried to weasel their way out of it, but I living there now.
However, some places don’t even run a background check. A nice complex down the street only ran a credit check.
Oh and always look professional and never grovel.

Bay area Res.,
Did you feel it necessary to show your expungent of the crime, did they ask if you were a registrant? As a guy with the same circumstances here, I also have copy of expungement. How do you go about this just wait to they ask you if you have past record? Don’t give it up if you don’t have to? Sounds like we have to decide ourselves?

Any lawyers here care to speculate how a new Smith v. Doe would turn out?

I’d say we have three guaranteed votes in our favor: Ginsburg, Breyer, and Gorsuch. Thoughts on the other 2 needed?

If they reheard it, it might be five (Alito, Roberts, Gorsuch, Thomas, and Kavanaugh) to four (Kegan, Sotomyer, Breyer and Ginsburg) in favor of Gundy.

Gundy is final. The request for rehearing was denied.

You may know this, but while one party in both Gundy and Smith were “sex offenders”, the question in Gundy and the question in Smith had nothing at all in common. While there might be one or two justices who would rule in a way favorable to the “sex offender” party in both cases, most would likely be in opposite camps on the questions presented.

To clarify, the SCOTUS blog article suggests that a future, similar non-delegation case might be ruled 5 to 4 that too much of the legislature’s authority had been unconstitutionally delegated. (In “Gundy”, for example, to the USAG.)

I don’t know who the other 2 would be, but I’m rather sure of 2 who they would NOT be: Alito (always falls on the side of LE) and Roberts (hired-gun attorney who argued for AK in Smith). That leaves Kavanaugh, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Of those three, I only see Sotomayor as a possibility. I don’t trust Kav. in any case to help the citizen. Kagan, as a former Solicitor General, is a bit of a law-and-order liberal.

My reading of Alito’s limp-wrist concurrence in Gundy made it sound to me like he is open to looking into another non-delegation case, just not one involving “those people.”

Florida ?? Is there any news about two lawsuits in Florida, both about Florida keeping people on their Florida Registry long after they’ve moved a ay or died?
(I posted last month, but did not see any replies.)

Finally a “Homeless Shelter” (Clarksburg Mission’s) is sticking up for “Humans” on the registry.

However the newly elected councilman warns donors about this shocking finding and suggests that donations to the shelter should cease until the rules of the shelter are changed.

“Gary Keith, Clarksburg City councilman, stooped to a new low by hurtling accusations at the Mission on a Facebook video for 30 meandering, disjointed minutes.”

“Councilman accuses mission of bringing in sex offenders”–565302392.html

‘Marissa Rexroad, associate director with the Clarkburg Mission gave a statement saying “We’re not going to engage with the kind of morally bankrupt dialogue that he’s put forward.” Rexroad says, “We’re committed to a solution focused process with the task team on homelessness with the Harrison county task among homelessness and we’re not going to engage with this kind of morally bankrupt dialogue.’

Thank you Marissa!!

Maybe beating a dead horse on this question, but bare with me. Janice, if you want to chime in,

Filing for a 311.11(a) reduction to misdomeanor. 6 yrs since release from jail in Northern Ca.
If I wait to file ( due to shortage of funds ), until 2021 and the tier system takes affect, am I a tier 1 or 2 ? and is the reduction retro active if tier level is in fact reduced. I wasn’t going to bother with any of it, didn’t see the reason to, but someone told me to not give in and fight for every inch of ground. Any victory is a good victory.

I believe at the moment a felony 311.11 is T3 with a misdemeanor being T1. I don’t see any reason why a reduction in your charges wouldn’t effect your tier at any point. It might take a while to take effect, but if you manage to reduce it at a later date, you should be bumped down.

Thx for responding. I have asked different law firms supposedly specializing in reductions, but get different answers.

I finished an article that listed an ICE agent that was convicted to 6 yrs for possesdion of multiple CP videos. He had used his goveenment ID to gain access to the site.
It seems that the people that judge us are worse than we are.

@So tired:
“It seems that the people that judge us are worse than we are.”
You mean like the LA cop just busted for groping a corpse? Ooops..someone forgot about the two-minute recording buffer on body cams. (He had turned it off, but the camera kept rolling.)

And so it begins…

Got my letter yesterday from the local PD reminding me of my duty to register and that I need to call in for an appointment.

It ends by saying that if I don’t register they’ll file a criminal complaint with the DA. Very nice to be threatened like that.

Icing on the cake though is how the letter starts. It says “As a convicted sex offender…” Well, let’s see, I got my 1203.4 and 17b this year so basically as far as the law is concerned I don’t think I’m “convicted” anymore at all. I really wonder if I can sue them for this. Or at least a strongly worded letter 🙂

I really hate getting this letter every year, makes me feel like less of a person. I’ll see if I can muster the courage to ask them to stop sending it. I think I’m perfectly capable of remembering to register every year. Nobody needs to remind me to not break the law.

If you are still a registrant, then you are designated as a “convicted sex offender”.

PC 290.5 removed all the benefits of 1203.4 from all registrants via PC 290.007, where it disregards you earning 1203.4. It makes no sense because the registry is disseminating information.

PC 1203.4 provides three privileges or immunities:
1) the court shall set aside the verdict of guilty;
2) and, in either case, the court shall thereupon dismiss the accusations or information against the defendant and except as noted below,
3) 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.

Please note the word “shall”. I don’t think anyone has addressed that the current form of the registry is disseminating information of your accusation/information. Back in 1958, Kelly v Municipal allowed you to de-register from PC 290 because in-person re-registration was a disability/criminal in nature as well as PC 290 cannot override 1203.4. The registry in 1958 kept the information only to the police department and wasn’t shared about like it is now to background checks and the IML.

Because of the 2003 Smith v Doe SCOTUS decision that the registry is regulatory, it removed in-person re-registration in California as a disability/criminal in nature; which also made your 1203.4 meaningless as your civil rights aren’t restored because the State pushed it further back to where you need the CoR to get off the registry. That’s double jeopardy because you proved your test through successfully completing probation to earn 1203.4, but you have to continue to prove yourself again for a total of 10 years as well as be re-judged. Recall, the courts already determined your judgement by giving you probation and there is nothing within 1203.4 that states you must continue to register. NO WHERE in 1203.4!

PC 290.5 and PC 290.007 overrode 1203.4, but it’s odd for it to do so because it negates you being a part of the 1203.4 class. In Kelly v Municipal, they laid down the law that PC 290 cannot usurp PC 1203.4:

[4] A word should be said concerning the state’s contention that section 290 should prevail upon the theory that it is a special and 1203.4 is a general statute. They are not in that [160 Cal. App. 2d 46] category. They do not meet the test for the rule which the state invokes, declared in In re Williamson, 43 Cal. 2d 651, 654 [276 P.2d 593], in these words: ” ‘It is the general rule that where the general statute standing alone would include the same matter as the special act, and thus conflict with it, the special act will be considered as an exception to the general statute …’ ” Section 1203.4 deals with all probationers, including those who have committed none of the offenses mentioned in section 290. In addition, section 290 applies to some convicted persons who are ineligible for probation as well as to some who are eligible. Clearly, the rule invoked does not apply.

The parties have given considerable attention to the applicability or inapplicability of our holding in Truchon v. Toomey, 116 Cal. App. 2d 736 [254 P.2d 638, 36 A.L.R.2d 1230], interpretive of the word “conviction” as used in section 1 of article II of the Constitution, relating to loss of the elective franchise. We perceive no similarity, no conflict, and no problem. In the Truchon case we pointed out that the word “conviction” has been used in criminal statutes with varying meanings. As used in the constitutional provision there involved we held that “conviction” referred to a judgment which remained final, thereby differing from a mere plea or verdict of guilty. Here we are considering the use of the word “conviction” as it appears in two statutes. Section 290 uses it in both senses: After judgment, in respect to the convict who has served his sentence or who is released upon parole; during the suspension of imposition or execution of sentence (see Pen. Code, § 1203.1), in relation to the probationer. Section 1203.4, because it deals with the probationer, has reference to his status as a convicted person during the period of suspension of imposition or execution of sentence.

Kelly v Municipal link:

Because the registry has gone beyond being held only by the police department, it is now shared everywhere, even if you’re not on Megan’s list. Your accusation/information is shared on background checks. Your accusation/information is shared to the IML (International Megan’s List). So what does this mean? It means your accusation/information is not dismissed despite the courts stating it “shall” be dismissed.

Again, this wasn’t an issue when the registry was first started as the information was isolated and the only issue at hand was in-person re-registration was deemed quasi-criminal and a disability (as it restricted movement). I do not know if anyone has ever sued the state for violating the second privilege/immunity provided within 1203.4 as you are no longer a convict, which is also supported within Kelly v. Municipal.

Remember, California Constitution, article 1, section 7 b states: “A citizen or class of citizens may not be granted privileges or immunities not granted on the same terms to all citizens. Privileges or immunities granted by the Legislature may be altered or revoked.”

Although the privileges or immunities can be altered or revoked, it must be applied to all citizens or class of citizens. PC 290.5 revokes “the court shall thereupon dismiss the accusations or information against the defendant” immunity by continuing to disseminate your accusation/information as though you are currently a convicted assailant, which you are not.

PC 290.5 address two parts to negate Kelly v Municipal relief:
1) the registry is a regulatory scheme (in-person re-registration isn’t a punishment/disability)
2) designated the potential de-registration of 10 years via the CoR

Technically, because no disability exists there is no overlap between 1203.4 and 290. Kelly v Municipal cited that 290 didn’t specify a way to de-register, but PC 290.5 defined it to be a 10-year wait to potentially be de-register via CoR (Certificate of Rehabilitation) – again, no overlap between 1203.4 and 290.

PC 290.5 failed to address “the court shall thereupon dismiss the accusations or information against the defendant”. This is where overlap exists (and I don’t know if it’s ever been addressed in court). Despite you earning the 1203.4, your accusation/information is still being disseminated to background check in the state, nationally (to military installations), and internationally (to passports for the IML).

Now, there exists a conflict between 1203.4 and 290. Because the conflict exists, that induces Kelly v Municipal to be relevant again. Thus, it should automatically de-registers you once you successfully complete probation as opposed to being re-judged in 10 years time to potentially de-register.

The state recognizes you are no longer a convict and your crime does not exist. Yet, at the same time, the state identifies your crime still exists as your are forced to participate in the registry scheme and have your information disseminated everywhere. Hence, you are a “convicted sex offender”.

This brings us to a macro issue, “what’s the difference between a convicted sex offender and a non-convicted sex offender?” Nothing because you are considered a high risk to the public. That’s unusual because for every other convict who earns a 1203.4, they are different. And for convicts who do not qualify for the 1203.4, then the other avenue is the CoR. Notice the vast difference of the application of 1203.4 – it is meaningless to a registrant.

The evidence is shown on the CoR application. All PC 290 have to take the path of the CoR despite there exists some offenses that cannot qualify for the CoR.

If I were to potentially bring up a case, then I would do research to see if the conflict of “the court shall thereupon dismiss the accusations or information against the defendant” exists. If not, then this issue should be brought up as we have overlapping laws that contradict one another between 1203.4 and 290. 290 is the dissemination of public information, but 1203.4 states your information of your conviction no longer exists nor shall it be used once earned.

1203.4 states you never committed a crime (and it can only be used in criminal court cases, IIRC). 290 states you committed a crime. They both cannot be true.

@ JesusH

I think you might have something here. PC 290 states your accusation/information is currently standing as you’re a part of the registry, but you earning the 1203.4 also states, “the court shall thereupon dismiss the accusations or information against the defendant.”

There is a conflicting overlap between the two statutes. Both cannot be true.

I wonder if this issue is something Janice can help or Janice can inform us that it has already been addressed. The courts and DA agreed that you are of low risk to deserve the immunities of 1203.4, but the registry signifies you are of high risk as you’re a lifetime registrant. Again, both cannot be true.

The Google Play app “Sex Offender Lookup” has some very interesting reviews. Seems the app tries to sell the data for a high price and then says it gets its information from a third party when it is incorrect.

Sorry everyone for a simple question… need some guidance on how to get court transcripts. If anyone has knowledge of how to get I would greatly appreciate the assist.

@Interested Party
Don’t know what state you are from but here in PA (would assume it is the same everywhere) I wrote to the county of my conviction attention: Prothonotary (Clerk of Courts). Gave them my personal information about my conviction in that county and requested my court transcripts of my hearings etc. I was in state prison at the time so I received them for free. I believe there is a charge for them. Best to call the “Clerk of Courts” and request them. You will probably have to submit a request in writing. But they should let you know what the charge will be for them.

Hope this helps

The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) goes into effect Jan 1, 2020 (in 3 weeks). The wording is similar to the European GDPR and includes provisions regarding the deletion of personal information collected by websites:

I’m wondering if this could help registrants get information removed from third-party “registry” websites that attempt to commercialize personal information, such as OffenderWatch, Family WatchDog, HomeFacts, and so on. This new online privacy law could help registrants and their families in some specific areas.

@ Sunny: *Fingers crossed*

Oh, okay, yeah.

So they continue to do what they are not supposed to do, so we’ll make it easier for them. Huh? 😒

Now the legislators can get back to creating new ways to ex post facto punish Registrants, right? 😠

You know I find it extremely puzzling that anyone, including any attorneys, can read the CA Harris decision and not see how it mirrors the notification elements of SORA. The CA SC would have to completely contradict and reverse if it held any different in a suit against SORA for the same reasons.

Plaintiff has pleaded a right to association as well, ECF Nos. 1 at 14, which includes freedom of speech and association on the Internet in his First Amendment challenge and fears divulging his identity online for the exact reasons as stated in Doe v. Harris because he is on a publicly accessible sex offender registry,
“But sex offenders’ fear of disclosure in and of itself chills their speech. If their identity is exposed, their speech, even on topics of public importance, could subject them to harassment, retaliation, and intimidation. See McIntyre, 514 U.S. at 341–42 (“The decision in favor of anonymity may be motivated by fear of economic or official retaliation, by concern about social ostracism, or merely by a desire to preserve as much of one’s privacy as possible.”), Brown v. Socialist Workers ’74 Campaign Comm. (Ohio), 459 U.S. 87, 100 (1982) (holding that disclosure requirements may subject unpopular minority groups to “threats, harassment, and reprisals.”)
The Harris Court considered the consequences in their entirety, as this Court is bound by precedent to do.
Plaintiff participates in “no” social media accounts for this very reason, severely interfering in his personal familial associations and relationships, associations with the general public, associations in his professional life, and chills his speech significantly.

Vice did a nice three-part series on Ring and how it’s working with LE to create a surveillance network that is able to dodge the constitution. I know something along this line has been posted before (by @TS?), but part two of the series goes into some detail about how nefarious it all is. Though they don’t explicitly address it as such, Ring uses the Third Party Doctrine to hoard and possibly release videos to LE **even if you say no.** EVERYthing your Ring device captures is fair game for Ring’s use, including giving it to LE without a warrant or subpoena. Third Party Doctrine needs to be hanged, drawn, quartered, and then tossed in the fire. It was a shaky decision when SCOTUS created it; it’s a dangerous one now with pretty much everything in one’s life held by others.

Part Two:


Yes, I shared the Ring stories earlier this year. They need to need be continually shared here as far as I’m concerned. People in this forum need to be aware.

Guess I am going to have to file in state as well. I bet I can get an immediate injunction as well as it moves thru the CA courts.

If the stated disabilities are the bar I see it being met many times over by SORA,

Seems as though CA SC has a problem with subjecting ” them to harassment, retaliation, and intimidation.”

Here’s a video I just came across that was put up 4 months ago. It was very interesting to watch. I don’t think he will be doing anymore “stings” anytime soon, if ever.

The Rise and Fall of Chris Hansen from “To Catch a Predator”

@Janice- As we’re nearing the Tiered System in Ca I was wondering if and when you and your team will challenge the FTR 3yr penalty?
I had an FTR 13 years ago because of a technicality. I had to take a felony charge and live another 3 years on probation being harassed by LE every month and had the clock reset for the 7yr background check when trying to find a job. Not to mention the 4 months I spent in jail waiting for a judgment and the marriage that deteriorated during the process… I feel I have paid my debt in full and don’t see why I should be given additional time on the list 20 years later.

I live to see the day when the media runs this headline:

“The dark side of Megan’s Law – it’s more about money than you think.”

I’m working on getting my Certificate of Rehabilitation and was informed by the public defender’s office that the DA in Los Angeles is now upping their game when it comes to fighting to keep us on the registry. In many cases, they’re arguing against the CoR or they’re arguing that the person should not be relieved of the requirement to register…and their winning. I was also told this was prompted by the fact that the tiered registry is coming. As someone part of that group moved from Tier 1 to Tier 3 just before it was approved, I’m feeling pretty drained of hope. I’m still moving forward to try to get the CoR, but it’s not sounding likely that I’ll get it.

Dear td777

The PD may just be being careful from you having unrealistic hopes…he also may just be being honest.

HOWEVER, none of the above is cause for you to not seek a CoR, and for you to not put forth your best efforts in these regards…

Keep pressing for the CoR…with a friendly, but firm smile

Good Luck, James I

I just got my COR last week in LA Court working with Public Defenders office; Jane . I went for the first court date and the judge who was sitting on he bench is not Pro COR for SO so the PD set a new date. Then the DA informed that HE wanted a psych report (my crime was attempted molest from sting 664-288(a)) so I got a letter from a psychologist I has seen in the past…no good…wanted a formal report saying I was unlikely to re offend. Anyway got the COR …. BUT…was told I still have to register . Waiting for the paperwork and see if I get off Megan Law…am seeing that the COR will help with the new Tiered in 2021
Good Luck

It’s been well known that L.A. was a difficult County to get a CoR approved. You would be better off moving to another County and try it there.

That’s probably the case in every county. In Orange County or Riverside County, you can pretty much forget any chance of getting a CoR.

My bad, I was actually thinking of Orange County. I’m actually not as familiar with SoCo as I am in NoCal.

I live in Bay Area. I have a misdomeanor offense (CP) from 6 yrs ago. I saw that Amazon was flooding the area with job opportunities. I went to job fair, applied for a midnight warehouse job figuring it was a safe bet. After talking to a Rep for a few minutes, I was “offered” a higher position at a different location. I was told that I seemed to be a step above most applicants. I finished the process and left. I was stopped on the way out by the Rep and she thanked me for applying ( not exactly normal for job fairs). That was Nov 23rd. I have yet to recieve any response besides the notice by independent background company that my offense was being forwarded to Amazon.
My point is people will notice that you may be a cut above their normal applicants, but the title of sex offender will never get you past the front door. Even at a dump warehouse at 2am.

That’s a violation of the California Fair Chance Act. You have to be offered employment BEFORE they can start the background check. Even then, the prospective employer must evaluate whether the applicant should still receive the job in light of the severity of the crime, the nature of the crime, and the amount of time that has passed since conviction.


SB 530 (pertaining to 1203.4) link:

Actually, employers can’t use any information sought against you in the employment process, according to SB 530, which was passed in 2014. The only exception to that rule? If you’re a registrant. (how sad)

Read the analysis and see how registrants are not shared the equal opportunity to improve their lives like anyone else who earned the 1203.4. It’s shocking to read we’re second class citizens.

SB 530, 1203.4 Bill analysis link:

In short, SB 530 created a disability within 1203.4 that extends to the hiring process, but that disability isn’t extended to registrants who also earned the 1203.4. Something isn’t adding up here and not equal.

@ New Person,

Your analysis is incorrect with respect to SB 530. You are presuming that this law applies to all places of employment regardless of the field. That is not what SB 530 says.This is only for those seeking employment at a health care facility who will work with patients.

The law states that there is an exception where an employer at a health care facility can ask an applicant to disclose if they are 290 if that applicant is going to work directly with patients.

So tired: I understand where you’re at. I have been torpedoed out of several jobs, or not hired to begin with. For what it’s worth, here is my suggestion: Find something that you can do as a self-employed individual. That’s probably the only way. Especially if you’re looking to make actual, life-sustaining money. Be creative. There are lots of things that all of us can do, and earn a living with. You just need to find what fits for you. I have held a Class A driver’s license for many, many years. I can’t even do that anymore. Most truck drivers are subjected to background checks in California-Stan now too. Even though they spend hours on end, totally by themselves, driving up and down the highways. More than 80% of companies do background checks now. And there is NO WAY you’ll get hired at any respectable job if they see the results of that check. So……Start your own small business. That’s my thoughts, such as they are.

I too am a class A license holder and I’ve definitely had one hell of a time finding gainful employment. I had to start off at a small company driving really old beater trucks hauling wood products and barely made more than min. wage with the hours I worked. I actually got lucky and moved up to a major for about half a year on a dedicated contract making fairly decent money until the contract was canceled and I was laid off. Took me awhile to find work again and was turned down by numerous companies, despite having 3+ yrs of experience, once the background checks came back. One of them actually told me outright that I was disqualified because I showed up on two state registries (states that I haven’t lived in in years but run their registries Hotel California-style). In other words, disqualified from hauling inanimate freight to/from warehouses, with minimal public interaction, despite meeting literally every other criteria for the job. It’s not like I was trying to get a job as a goddamn school bus driver.

So, one CAN find driving work, but it’s an uphill battle on par with climbing Everest. You’ll end up just settling for whoever will take you after weeks or months of rejections and growing desperation, and if you get lucky and get a local/line haul type gig like I did and you live in a metro area, you’ll be stuck working graveyard hours for far less money than you could be making if you weren’t forced to settle and actually had options. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad they took a chance on me and it’s a fair amount better than minimum wage work, but being on the registry has insanely hampered my ability to make a living. I am seriously looking into owning some type of business and have a couple ideas in mind.

Since your’e offense is that old, it’s still eligible for the 1203.4 expungement (convictions in 2014 forward are not for this offense). This can’t be denied to you as long as all your fines are paid up and you haven’t had any issues while on supervision.

If your offense is a misdemeanor, then you shouldn’t even be on the Megan’s Law website. If you are, get that 1203.4 because it will remove you. Just be sure that your conviction date is on or BEFORE December 31, 2013

Just as an FYI: I, too, have an expunged misdemeanor and not (nor ever was) on the website. I have passed background checks related to employment and housing.

Don’t get discouraged. Despite what Matt said, there are jobs out there that don’t do background checks. I, too, am in the Bay Area and only one potential employer conducted a background check, and they still offered me employment. However, I turned it down for another, better paying position at that time.

I should note, though, that none of the employers had an actual application. They were all places that requested resumes and professional references. So as long as you have the qualifications, education and experience, there should be no reason why you can’t be employed (that is, after you file the 1203.4).

You maybe right, So Tired, however, that is less than 10 working days ago. I would not jump ship just yet.

One of the big issues is potential perceived liability. Not sure if there is a way around that. Possibly if the threat of a discrimination lawsuit trumps the liability one….
If an employer is afraid, they will not take the chance. Similar to a landlord with laws being passed which shifts potential liability to them.

Liability is always an issue. I would bet 99.9% of attorneys would tell employers not to hire any felon or sex registrant.

Sorry to hear this, but consider it a blessing. Do you REALLY want to work in a menial job for less than you’re worth? Do you really want to fall into such a fricken’ trap? Man, for you and anyone else tired of getting canned or passed over for whatever reason, the time is now to start your own business and generate several other streams of income. This is not just advice for registrants who can’t find gainful employment. It’s for anyone who wants to have a life of financial freedom, enjoy life and have your adult diaper changed by a professional and not a burdened loved one.
Don’t go to job fairs, dude. Go to small business opportunity conferences. Buy or start a business doing something you enjoy and are good at and if you lose a client, you’re only down that percentage of your income.
If you can find solid employment that will help you build net worth, fantastic. If you can’t, you just have to make it happen. No excuses!

As a follow up to my issue with Amazon, their third party background agency reported to amazon of my SO status, even though 6 yrs ago and misdomeanor (cp).
I was applying for a midnight shift warehouse at their large merchandise location, doubt if too many women there.
I was turned down.
My therapist said , “ good! Why would you want that job.You want something better.” Her response told me she hasn’t a clue of the stress we are under just to survive. Sure I want something better, having a MS degree, but have been turned down multiple times in my field and now can’t even get hired at Amazon, who says they hire sex offenders(?). As a single mature man, I begin to doubt if I even have a future.

Business insurance agents and companies do tell their clients to not hire people on the registry. I’ve seen it in person as one who was denied by that reason. Have the proof still.

This is 100% true. My sister is an executive with Church Mutual. They will drop any clients they uncover that hires sex offenders. They have three full time employees in their Merrill, WI office that do research on the employees of their clients to uncover felons of all types.

Please elaborate – you could not get business insurance because you’re on the registry?
I’m currently shopping for E & O insurance for my consultancy.
Looking forward to your response. Thanks!


No, the company I interviewed with said they could not hire me because their insurer warned them that they could lose their business insurance if they did hire me, which is what they wanted to do. I have that in writing.

I’m sorry to hear that.

Using the sex offender registry as a weapon against combative family…

I have an inlaw member who continually slams me on social media, I get screenshots sent to me by other people, I left social media earlier this year. She is very sweet to my face. I go to her property to pick up and drop off my direct relative.

Since I am on her property a few times a week, I am thinking about adding her address to my annual registration. Even though I am on her property often, I do not overnight there.

Has anyone done this?

Sadly I must admit, my motivation to consider this is not to be over-compliant with the registration requirement, but to teach her a lesson.

@Request Opinion…..Unfortunately, family doesn’t always act like family. I’ve been more fortunate than most in terms of my overall experience having to deal with the registry for 25+ years. The worst persecutions have come not from cops, teachers, principals, neighbors, or employers but from family members who attempt to use the already public registry to further shame me publicly. Unfortunately, this is just another consequence inflicted upon us by the registry. My (unsolicited) advice is to live your best exemplary life with integrity and try to force people to see past the “label”. That is what I’ve attempted to do and I’ve found that the public perception of me is largely more positive then the spiteful relatives who tried to use this to harm me. As fun and satisfying as it would be to co-register your relative’s address take pause to reflect on the pain caused by the lack of privacy afforded to us. I wouldn’t wish this status on my worst enemy. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are hard enough to come by when you’re a registered citizen!

@ Josh:. Excellent advice! 👍
“My (unsolicited) advice is to live your best exemplary life with integrity and try to force people to see past the ‘label’.”

I have learned that unless you already had a relationship or a family, you are in this on your own for your life. That is unless you want to drag someone you care about through a river if shit. Or if you want to continually be tossed away when the other has gotten fed up with their friends abondoning them because of you.
I was ready to end it, but stopped short. I pulled over and texted my okd therapist and told them. The response was “ Oh Dear, that’s not good.”
Accepting that your talents ( and many of us have vast experience, degrees, etc) won’t help, your personality and abilities will mean nothing once a person discovers your scarlet letter, and everything is being done to purge you from society. Death really is the only place that most of us will finally be rid of this burden.

Do you really want to escalate this? You would list this person’s address as a residence to go on the registry, a place where someone cares for your “direct relative?” Think this through – do you want the offending relative to be that much more involved and then get your “direct relative” involved, not to mention the police, too? You said you don’t even stay there. Would it be a crime to list that address as a residence? Use your head.
If you need that relative for logistical help with other relatives (eg. picking kids up and watching them after school), then you need to make nice. Kill them with kindness. The holidays are a great time to do so. Antagonizing them would simply be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

So there’s more BS.

Been calling the PD since Friday to schedule the appointment for my yearly. Have left messages and still nothing.

I want to hurry up and get something scheduled so I can plan out the rest of my holiday break. Can’t do a thing until this appointment is setup.

So damn frustrating.

I think this whole thing is beyond ‘cruel and unusual’. It’s psychological torture being held hostage to just try and get the damn appointment scheduled. I mentioned in an earlier post about having your yearly centered on your birthday instead of your conviction date. That’s cruel and unusual as well.

If you had to renew your registration on the anniversary of your conviction date then your predicament is because of your conviction. By basing it instead on your birthday, they’re saying there’s something wrong with YOU. WTF indeed.

Cert of Rehab Question in California
I recently received a COR for a 664-288(a) offense in 2001. I have waited and worked for this in the attempt to get done with registration and off the Megan Site. I was told it would happen BUT, when I was in front of the judge and when I received the paperwork. They are demanding that I still have to do the annual registration. Can someone help me understand how and when this changed from the time others in here had received their COR

Please read the comments at this link for more info:

With Census positions coming available here is a story about a sex offender that was hired but then was arrested for another charge… way to ruin it for everyone

📞☎️ Please note: Tomorrow (Saturday) a.m. @ 10:00 a.m. PCT is an Telephone Conference Call ASCOL MEETING! Please call in and participate – or just listen & learn! Look for the ACSOL posting that provides the Conference Call Phone Number & Code.
We are All in this together! 📞☎️

📞☎️ ACSOL Conference Call at 10 a.m. today ☎️📞

COR follow up I just read this and have some questions :
A Certificate of Rehabilitation (“COR”) is a California court-order declaring that a person previously convicted of a felony (or misdemeanor sex offense) is now rehabilitated. The purpose of the COR is to restore civil and political rights of citizenship to ex-felons who have proved their rehabilitation.
Does the restoration of my civil rights include not having to be a registered citizen??
Thanks for feedback and response


Matt … your answer was short what should I do since I was told by the judge and paperwork I have to still register…my Public Defender has not offered any more assistance


There are exceptions to the CoR. The plus side is you have the ability to have the Governor’s Pardon to relieve you of the duty.

I did find a listing of which offenses that do not relieve you of the duty to register with the CoR:

You will still be required to register pursuant to Penal Code Section 290 upon obtaining a Certificate of Rehabilitation under Penal Code Section 290.5 for any of the following convictions:

Kidnapping under Section 207 or 209 committed with the intent to commit:
– Rape (PC261);
– Sodomy (PC286);
– Lewd or lascivious act with a minor (PC 288);
– Oral copulation (PC 288a); or
– Sexual penetration by force (PC289)
– Assault under Section 220 (except assault to commit mayhem);

Felony sexual battery (PC 243.4);
Rape (PC 261), under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (6) of subdivision (a);
Rape by foreign object (PC 264.1);
Felony enticement of a minor (PC 266);
Felony sexual intercourse induced by fraud (PC 266c);
Procurement of child under age 16 for lewd or lascivious acts (PC 266j);
Abduction of a minor for prostitution (PC 267);
Aggravated sexual assault of a child (PC 269);
Felony sodomy (PC 286);
Lewd or lascivious acts with a child under age 14 (PC 288);
Felony oral copulation (PC 288a);
Continuous sexual abuse of a child (PC 288.5);
Felony sexual penetration by force (PC 289);
Annoying or molesting a child under 18 (PC 647.6);
The attempted commission of any of the offenses listed above;
The statutory predecessor of any of the offenses specified above; or
Any offense which, if committed or attempted in this state, would have been punishable as one or more of the offenses specified above.

The Supreme Court said on Monday that it would not hear a closely watched case City of Boise v. Martin on whether cities can make it a crime for homeless people to sleep outdoors.

The case was brought by six people in Boise, Idaho, who said a pair of local laws violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. One prohibited “camping” in streets, parks and other public property. The other prohibited “lodging or sleeping” in any place, whether public or private, without the owner’s permission.

A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, ruled for the plaintiffs and struck down the laws, saying the Constitution does not allow prosecuting people for sleeping outdoors if there is no shelter available.

The Supreme Court typically understands the Eighth Amendment to address acceptable punishments rather than what conduct can be made criminal. But in 1962, it struck down a California law that made being a drug addict a crime on Eighth Amendment grounds.

Relying on that decision and quoting from an earlier Ninth Circuit ruling, Judge Marsha Berzon, writing for the panel, said “the Eighth Amendment prohibits the state from punishing an involuntary act or condition if it is the unavoidable consequence of one’s status or being.”

I think there is a comparable case to be made based on Eighth Amendment “cruel and unusual punishment” relating to the myriad restrictions and limitations applied to all registered sex offenders, regardless of their crime, when it occurred and the likelihood of their re-offense. I would recommend starting in a district court in the Ninth Circuit — sounds like they are very reasonable and would see the insanity of the current state of sex offenders laws growing like Topsy across America — virtually unchallenged for their constitutionality since Smith v Doe in 2003, when the Supreme Court help the registry to be “non-punitive.” It is obviously “punitive” today in so many ways.

Here’s a link to the story in The New York Times today:

To those that keep saying ‘“lead an exemplary life and show them”, I seem to recall another prrson that led that kind of life. He was hung on a cross and stabbed with spear. At least he could live within 1000 ft of a school.


“Hey, I know! Let’s just dump all of our sex offenders into the snow this New Years!”


The mayor suddenly realizes that “sex offenders” exist. Decides they must leave by January.

🐘”Former (GOP) Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin on Thursday defended his controversial last-minute pardon of a man convicted of raping a 9-year-old, saying there was no physical evidence of her abuse.”
That’s it! I’m switching parties 🐎 and becoming a fundraising bundler for the Republicans! I’ll get my record wiped clean AND be appointed Ambassador to Wherever-I-Want! 🙄
Henceforth, I would appreciate you’re referring to me as “Mister Ambassador.” 😁

I don’t know why I am writing this here. I guess because I have no where and no one else.
I have been looking for jobs to kerp me afloat for 4 yrs. No one will hire me. Even places that say they hire felons trun me down. I have depleted my savings to the point that I probably won’t be able to pay rent or bills for Jan.
I have answered multiple ads for rooms, but that old registry thing keeps getting in the way.
I thought I could somehow get back on my feet one day and live a quiet life, but I really can’t see it happening. I wake up every morning thinking about creative ways to disappear. I don’t want my death to be on any local news because I’m too ashamed if anyone I know hears about it. If I go far enough away then it wouldn’t be covered here.
I figure if I do it now, then everyone will be so wrapped up in the holiday that they won’t notice. Everyone will figure I went to visit someone else.
I really did try, but I guess this is to be my path. I’m tired.

So tired…. I get it. We are slowly being tortured. It is cruel. We have much to rejoice for. 2019 brought us several court ordered improvements. There are huge changes coming. We have tipped the scales of justice in our favor. Pennsylvania and Michigan both are being forced to make changes. While I understand this does you no good in the short term, change is coming. Do not give up on the verge of the battle being won. These laws are unconstitutional and illegal. Hang in there my friend. Do NOT give in to the bastards. You are not alone. We are 1 million strong now

with about 890,000 remaining silent…smfh

…and we need to get them to speak up and energize them.

@ So Tired: Where are you located?

@So Tired. Where are you located. I am also looking for a job and have been turned down by many. AND lost my REALLY good job of 25 years because they “found out” But… please tell us where you are located.

Merry Christmas everyone.

I put a query out earlier on court opinion publishing stats and a related website that was shown here in the forum, but got no reply. However, today, I was able to find some stats of what I was looking for on this page: Federal Court Management Statistics,

I mention it because some cases take longer than others with no known reason, e.g. waiting for another case to finish since it was similar or the panel has not decided yet (in their prerogative). I would take some of the stats here with leeway considering there is all sorts of gerrymandering with filing of delays, etc that will drag out cases before they are finally dispositioned, but I will say 13.5 months from oral arguments to today with no opinion is not comforting because of unknown reasons.

Look forward to any thoughts you in the forum may have or other sites with info.

it would cost too much money for cops to collect the registration data. so they force the disfavored subclass to provide the data for free.

cert was denied in the piasecki case last november. registrants following SORNA requirements are “in custody” for habeas corpus purposes.

getting harder to deny that registrants are held in servitude for exploitation.

😠😠😠 Here is yet another reason why SORNA must be repealed/overturned/defeated! This unfortunate fellow was jailed simply for not having ID on him! Does this ever happen to anyone else??? Those on probation for DUI?: No! Those previously convicted of domestic violence?: No! Those previously convicted of any non-sexual offense felony?: No! 😡😡😡

Athens, ALABAMA: WHNT News 19: Sex offender arrested for not having identification during traffic stop in Athens.

Alabama should be dissolved and most of its residents forced to move to crappy, third world, authoritarian cesspool countries where they will fit in better. What a bunch of scumbags.

I’ll be praying that this guy very significantly retaliates for this and that he harms a lot of Registry Nazis. Thoughts and prayers for all the scumbags.

Only corrupt, criminal regimes have $EX Offender Registries.