We have drawn a line in the sand. No longer will we accept governmental decisions that exclude registrants from benefits provided to the rest of society. Instead, we will challenge in court those decisions which are based upon the myth that registrants “always” re-offend.
There are three such challenges now pending in state courts in California. The first challenge is to a decision by the Registrar of Voters in Los Angeles County that prohibits individuals convicted of a sex offense from serving as poll workers. This decision was made after a few school districts in that county complained that they did not want registrants on their campus. Regardless of the fact that there are no students present on election days. Regardless of the fact that state law requires registrants to obtain prior written permission before entering a school campus. Regardless of the fact that 56 out of 58 counties allow registrants to serve as poll workers.
The poll workers challenge was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court in May 2018. Both parties have filed Motions for Summary Judgement and a hearing on those motions is scheduled for January 24, 2020. If the court grants either motion, the case will end. We expect success in this case if only the court pays attention to the facts presented in that case: the re-offense rate for registrants is not high. In fact, the re-offense rate is low according to both government and academic studies such as reported in an annual CDCR report which has consistently found that the re-offense rate for a registrant on parole is less than one percent. And the U.S. Department of Justice has found that the re-offense rate for a registrant who has committed a violent contact offense is about 5 percent over a lifetime. Finally, Dr. Karl Hanson, the preeminent researcher on this topic, has concluded that a registrant who has lived in the community for 17 years or longer and has not re-offended, is very unlikely to commit a new offense.
The second challenge is to a decision made this year by the state legislature that prohibits registrants from serving on a jury. The legislature created this prohibition when it passed Senate Bill 310 which granted the right to serve on a jury to all other individuals convicted of a felony. Yes, that is correct. A person convicted of murder is eligible to serve on a jury, but a person convicted of a non-contact, non-violent sex offense is not eligible. There was no discussion of this exclusion during the legislative process, but instead was silently added by a member of the legislature who goes out of her way to limit the rights of registrants. The juror exclusion challenge was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court in November 2019.
The third challenge is to a decision made by an agency of the state government to deny the rights of a registrant to receive benefits from the Victims Compensation Fund which is available to citizens who are the victims of violent crime. The registrant lost three family members in a fire on a dive boat near Santa Barbara a few months ago. He would be eligible to receive benefits from that fund in the form of counseling except for the fact that he is required to register as a sex offender. The exclusion of fund benefits to anyone convicted of a sex offense is the result of recent legislation. The victims compensation fund challenged was filed in Sacramento Superior Court in December 2019.
We cannot and will not accept decisions by state and local governments to exclude a large group of its citizens from their rights and benefits. We have drawn a line in the sand and that line will continue to be reinforced through court challenges until and unless the government learns an important lesson: most registrants do not pose a current danger to society. In fact, the rate at which registrants re-offend is extremely low and continues to diminish as they spend more time in the community.
The fight has just begun and will continue until registrants are provided all of their rights and benefits. How many lawsuits will be required to reach this goal? The answer depends entirely upon how quickly state and local governments learn this important lesson.
Thank you Janice, for all you do, and for a little ammunition, here is an excerpt from Governor Newsome’s statement about why he chose to grant clemency to several undocumented immigrants. Their charges ranged from robbery, hit and run, evading police, shop lifting, assault, auto theft, and arson. One individual who received clemency from Governor Newsome had six prior felonies.
“Clemency is an important part of the criminal justice system that can incentivize accountability, rehabilitation, and increase public safety by removing counter productive barriers to successful reentry and correct the unjust results in the legal system. Theses individuals have served their sentences and have taken steps to rehabilitate themselves.” — Governor Newsome
Most of us aren’t asking for clemency, we are just asking to be allowed to live our lives in a manner that doesn’t have “counter productive barriers” that restrict our attempts at reintegrating into society. We just want a chance to have employment, housing, and relationships. We have served our sentences, too, and would also like another chance.
Thank you Janice and ACSOL…May you go forth and successfully conquer.
This is fantastic news. Go git em!
Much of this discrimination hinges on registrants not being a protected class. What if registrant business owners, rental property owners, and service providers started discriminating on the basis that someone was not a registrant, which logically speaking could not possibly be a protected class either. I imagine this would draw the ire of many people (non-registrants) decrying such a practice, but if enough registrants shifted their economic decisions to benefit those within their community, we could establish a thriving alternative economy where we would have more power and influence over the outcomes of our lives.
With almost a million households strong, we could leverage that economic power to benefit ourselves rather than those who continue to oppress us.
I concur. Thats disgusting. Denying the man assistance is NOT Acceptable!
I’m excited about this strategy. Major changes in law and perceptions start with challenging basic injustices, which is part of the strategy Janice describes.
I have read many wanting in past comments to jump right to the US Supreme Court for salvation. That is magical thinking disconnected from the reality of how law actually works.
So let’s all support ACSOL and Janice by showing up in Sacramento and other levels of government, writing, calling, and DONATING (VERY important so ACSOL has the resources it needs!)
We love you Janice and Co.
I Love this organisation, and the work they all do, To stand up and fight our fight.. I would like to see someone able to go against HUD they will deny help to those on the registry and tell you that’s why and yet The law prohibits using sex offender registry information as a reason to deny housing. yet it happens everyday, we have a aging population of registered people and this is gonna leave a whole lot of Family’s without resources to help, aging loved ones. not to count the 10s of thousands who need the extra help while young and needing help raising there family. Just my thoughts A Million man march at the white house I would be there.
Thank you! So many people who have no access to the information you provide due to the disturbing laws on the books would thank you if they could!
Thank you very much Janice But I really wish something could be done about people getting 20 years parole with no knowledge of it coming out of prison thinking you have three years parole and finding that out is devastating and the thought of wearing a GPS monitor all of that time. And I am not the only person going through this.
God bless Janice and company for all that they have done and are doing for the registered citizens. SCOTUS clearly got it wrong in smith vs doe. The recidivism myth was based on an unsubstantiated claim from people looking to drum up business. The only “frightening and high” statistic is how our state and federal circuits have denied basic human rights to over a million people. For god sakes in some states you can’t even buy your own child a Christmas gift. What is next? FEMA camps for registrants? This is disgusting! The world has not seen this type of logic since the Salem witch hunts or the holocaust. It’s sickening that elected officials would allow precedence that will destroy our entire legal system all in the name of fear mongering for votes. If you think the registries will stop with sex offenders you better think again. They didn’t stop in Germany and they won’t stop in the United States either.
Speaking of entitlements;
Plaintiff is also statutorily prohibited from Federal Housing. “The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires that all Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) establish lifetime bans on the admission to the Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher (Tenant-Based Section 8) programs for: Sex offenders subject to a lifetime registration requirement under a State sex offender registration program.” 24 CFR 960.204; 24 CFR 982.553. 42 U.S.C. § 13663 explicitly purports to deny housing to “dangerous sex offenders,” but in fact requires Public Housing Authorities to deny eligibility to anyone listed on a state sex offender registry, many of whom cannot be considered dangerous, but are guilty of offenses that were non-violent or consensual. See, Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 332 (1976) (recognizing entitlement to government benefits as important private interest).
Also see, https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/2012-28ATTACHMENT.PDF
Thank you Janice. I’m glad we’re ACSOL members at $10/month. Everyone else, please join financially, too!
Holy $h:t Janice, that is the most incredible, heartwarming and straight to the facts statement I have ever read, probably because it pertains to me! I will be donating. Should have been all along. I know you (we) will achieve TOTAL success (even if it means some losses or set-backs here & there) because it is righteous.
A few other things we’re denied…some more important than others, but all have no connection to the offense.
-Amateur radio (and other) FCC license
-SBA Loan
-FHA mortgages
Time to stop the madness.
I have talked many times here about us being denied assistance from the Victim’s Assistance Fund. It seems unjust that the State of CA can put us on a “hit list” for vigilantes to injure us, but we specifically cannot get our medical or funeral costs paid for by these non-taxpayer funds. (Funds come from court fines). I used to work closely with the State Board of Control’s Victims of Violent Crime Compensation Fund. I do know that this Victim fund holds monthly hearings for anyone denied, so victims can appeal the Claims Specialist’s denial of funds. They often will approve payments during these hearings because the fund is well financed and it’s politically good to just approve and pay since it’s money they have plenty of anyway. If anyone here has been a victim of a violent crime, be sure to fill out an application for reimbursement of financial losses even if they say you will be denied. You have the right to still file and when rules change, they often go back and approve the prior denied claims. Any felon can also be denied only if the compensation fund runs out of cash that budget year. However, the fund has not run out of cash for over 30 years as far as I know. I wonder if they are now doing background checks on a victim applicant or just relying on a victim self reporting their status. I know when I worked with them, background checks were not done. Although an application is signed under penalty of perjury.
I do believe that Janet will have a very easy time getting this rule reversed or at least put in the same status as any other felon. This will likely be a good one to go after first for an easy win as they won’t put much effort into fighting her.
What about the state of California taking away our daughter and ultimately the parental right of my wife and I, for no reason other than that I have to register, and my wife refused to divorce me because of her immigration case. Why is nobody doing anything about this? Is working as a poll worker garner more urgency than a baby girl being ripped from her mother’s arms for no reason other than spite?
My wife and I specifically went to a meeting in LA to speak with Janice and plead our case in person. after waiting patiently until she was no longer busy shaking hands or talking to others, we told her of our plight and struggles, and that we desperately needed her help to make things right, even offering to pay for her services. Instead we were dismissed, as she simply said “I wouldn’t even know where to start” not that she would try or even help us maybe find someone who could help us. We were simply told that she couldn’t be bothered with it because she already had so much going on.
My wife and I were crushed, to have our hopes dashed by the one person who people say is the champion of the down trodden and despised. I had told my wife for weeks before the LA meeting of her heroic exploits and how she would surely come to our aid, and right this terrible injustice.
I still dont believe my wife has forgiven me for getting her hopes up.
On January 27th of this coming year 2020, our daughter turns 6 years old. She was taken from us when she was only 5 months old, and has no memory of her own father. The courts used Family Code 3030(a)3 to take her from us, it reads.
“The fact that a child is permitted unsupervised contact with a person who is required, as a result of a felony conviction in which the victim was a minor, to be registered as a sex offender under Section 290 of the Penal Code, shall be prima facie evidence that the child is at significant risk.”
This means if you are babysitting your own child, and are visited by the police, or CPS and they are having a bad day or maybe dont like you or agree with you being allowed to have a family, they have the right to remove your child right then and there and you will have to go through the same nightmare that we were made to, and most likely will not get your child back. Especially if you have a cute healthy baby that is “Easily Adopted out”. It isnt just us either, I have heard of other families destroyed in a similar fashion here in CA.
How is it not a Civil rights violation to say that our parental rights are at the whim of a CPS worker? Anyone else has protections and recourse to prevent this from occurring. Why is it ok for them to say we are second class citizens, not afforded the same rights and liberties as our peers and that we are a danger to our own families? Why are they able to take a child without a court order or without any proof of wrong doing. Why are they able to terminate a person’s parental rights, not because they have done something wrong, but because they believe that “maybe” “sometime” in the future “something” could “possibly” happen, “maybe”. I didn’t know courts made decisions based on crystal balls or Ms. Cleo predictions. I thought in our system you have to actually do something (or at least be accused of doing something) before your punished.
I didn’t even meet my wife until I was out of prison, and our daughter was born 4 years later. So my conviction was several years before my daughter was even an idea.
Why don’t my wife and I have the right to have a family just like anyone else? Nowhere in our case were we accused of doing anything criminal in our lives or with our child. In fact we went above and beyond. They wanted a psychological evaluation on me, so we got two of them, from two different doctors which both said the same thing, that was absolutely no threat to my family in any way.
The truth is we were never supposed to win our case, it was lost before we ever stepped into that courtroom. Both attorneys were shocked and said it should never have gone this way. Of course we appealed, but it was rejected for some unclear reason. Every attorney I have showed this case has said that it was wrong and should not have happened, but didnt know what to do about it.
In the mean time my wife and I will be celebrating another Christmas without our daughter. Buying her present that will go under someone else’s tree. Presents we will never see her open or play with.
It’s been so long that I know a solution presenting itself is unlikely, but I still just can’t abandon hope.
I know this has been lengthy, so I apologize. And this is not meant to bash Janice in any way, I know she does a lot of great things for people all the time. This was only meant to reflect our struggles and feelings. And maybe to bring some awareness to the dark things quietly being done in family courtrooms, so that someone else might avoid this fate.
I recently went through the Courts in LA County and received a Certificate of Rehabilitation with the expectation of getting off of registration and Megan Website. My offense was 664/288(a) attempt as a result of a sting. I have learned that NO I still have to register and NO I am not off of the Megan Website. I was encouraged on this site to jump through all of the hoops and have encouraged others based on what I have found out is incorrect information. I have asked the Public Defender what I have gained and she said she does not know. Can someone please tell me what I have gained and what others have gained or will gain by getting the COR?
Thanks
I wonder when government (Federal, state and local) will be taken to court for over 3 decades, BIG LIE? The truth is clear and government has egg on their faces that they can not remove. That is the line I like to see.
Janice, do the many worthy causes you are fighting for include:
(1) Getting the tier for CP possession reduced to 1. It is that in federal SORNA and any state which has accepted SORNA guidelines. It’s really insane that it’s tier 3 in CA.
(2) Will the new law be applicable to someone who moves to CA many years after conviction in another state and who would if convicted in CA be free of registration?
(4) Can someone moving to CA get a CoR if all other qualifications exist?
Wake me up when you actually do draw a line in the sand and fight the registry as a whole on the basis it’s unconstitutional. THAT will be a fight I can support. Everything else here has failed me.
A line in the sand now who draws their own conclusions today one would say government but should one back up to the real sorce of “drawing line in the sand.” Meaning and ethicial values play a vital part in every way. We can take a biblical view or man’s view of government ethics today.
Today with the many issues and ordeals everything has to line up or is the liberty still cracked or is lady wisdom still blind or true justice. Yes one can say we don’t want you in our county or we don’t want you around kids. Actually who is drawing the line in the sand and thats were principals come in or did Pilate toss n the towel and give it to the general public.
Is man’s challenge to get to the moon or to get some recognization or reconciliation for his or her defendant that is on trial or is voting at polls still a right to all even the right to work at the polls whether one is an offender or not on probation or not. I wonder who is calling a pandermic disease a global nightmare today let along a sex offender scare type for the novice.
Sure Control is good but power status can be taken to far as in this voting poll issue or many of these other issues. Sure I took my quilty, at least I wasn’t lying, and many times one can be backed in a cornor. And yes voting is a choice and a right as the TV ad’s say.
The sex offender they say has no rights. I’m sure that is a work that is challenged each day for many and yes the courts know that. Who really wants to be in a sex offenders shoes or for that matter any offenders.
Yes again I thank Janice and her team or should we all worry over spilt milk. Team efforts are what its all about and NARSOL and ACSOL plus many more groups are in there for you the common people. And at one time I said a protest may not sound bad for equal justice and yes mankind is endowed with certain inalienable rights.