ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Feb 8 – Los Angeles, Mar 7 – Berkeley details

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Los Angeles, Sacramento, Phone)

Janice's Journal

Janice’s Journal: A Line in the Sand

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.

Join the discussion

  1. Eric

    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.

    • Will Allen

      Well said.

      You didn’t originate the phrases, but I disagree with “second chance” or “another chance” though. I don’t think people should say that.

      I’m not looking for any type of “chance”, “forgiveness”, “understanding”, or whatever from anyone. I did something wrong, I paid the legal sentence for it. For 99.99999% of the U.S. population, that isn’t even any of their business. Certainly no more so than is anything illegal that THEY did and for which our Nanny Big Governments REFUSE to keep ME, MY FAMILY, and the rest of the public informed about THEM (e.g. Gun Offenders). Certainly what I did wrong is not nearly as dangerous as what literally millions have done wrong.

      So I’m not looking for a “chance”. I’m telling them to get the f*ck out of my life or else. Get out of my family’s life. If there is any Registry “law” that harasses my family that you even mention one time is acceptable, that makes you a mortal enemy to me. It makes you a Registry Nazi. I’ve no need to have any concern for you or your family. I’m going to have a great life and any Nazi that tries to affect that has to pay.

      I’d like to see everyone drop the “another chance” phrase. Replace that with “stop being harassing idiots”.

      • Joe

        I totally agree with you, I feel the same way but I certainly will accept any relief at this point.

        • Eric

          @ Will Allen…Lol, your words are probably closer to my true sentiment, but I guess I am leaning a little towards the PC side to garner a little public support. But I think we need to cover all perspectives, so we are all right in how we feel towards the injustice and insanity directed at us.

    • Eddie

      Just like myself I was afforded all my leberties prior to the new version of Megan’s law then in a blink of an eye without knowtest I was strip of all my rights.. My conviction happened in 1981 i was order to register for TEN years then after many failed attemps to get off of registering 3 years after the TEN year registration requirement ordered at sentencing I was place on the life time requirement to register. Raising my daughter by myself on Goverment assistance when before the revision I worked as a store Manager of a big retail chain

  2. Laura

    Thank you Janice and ACSOL…May you go forth and successfully conquer.

    • Bill

      “Line In The Sand” will one day be the title of a future biopic starring Sandra Bullock or Julia Roberts as Janice Belluci who fought for the persecuted.

  3. Matt

    This is fantastic news. Go git em!

  4. James

    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.

    • Will Allen

      I’ve been doing it for decades now.

      I must form relationships with a lot of businesses. I’ve done that based on whether or not the business’ owners and principals think Registries are acceptable or not. Many of the businesses that I work with employ Registered People (RP). I don’t do any significant business with anyone until I find out about their Registry stance.

      If I need some specific work done and I don’t have any supplier, I’ll consult the Registries first. I’ve found a lot of businesses that way.

      It’s the same with my friendships and any other relationships/organizations/whatever that I support. I’m not going to interact with anyone unless I know they are anti-Registry.

      I will continue to marginalize and neutralize Registry Nazis.

      My stance is not well-publicized though. I suppose we need a national, public online Registry of businesses and individuals who are not Nazis. A “whitelist” of good people.

      • TP

        How about starting to all this network of people you have built who are anti registry to start speaking up to politicians and get new laws pass get rid of it?

        Grass roots campaigns are what it is going to take.

    • jm from wi

      (written prior to Wills post above) Any publicity and the general public would boycott us till we bleed. The commercial buildings I own include tenants which cater to children, mentally challenged, etc.
      The restaurants I own don’t need any negative publicity. My construction company works in schools etc. Publicity would be all negative. (I don’t even go to my own jobs).
      (Now maybe a car dealer running a sale for anyone who could prove they’re on the registry would be interesting) We are a PR nightmare. Our credit is impacted by the registry. I believe any help we give one another must be confidential, and un newsworthy. Someone please blast me on this whole comment and change my perspective.

      • TP

        In order to achieve what we all talk about of fully restoring all of our rights by ending the registry, we have to stand up and fight. As such, it means we have to speak up and be willing to go “out on a ledge.” Think of other civil rights movements, and if they had the same mentality as displayed in these two responses, they’d never have the rights they do now. They too were PR nightmares at the onset, but they still fought and achieved. We must do the same and not be shy.

        We have to stand up and say “yea we made mistakes, but we have paid out debt to society. We dont cause problems now and womt again….” and so on…

        Public minds have to be changed. They have to be educated and informed about truth, and not buy into the fear mongering that has been presented to them for so long.

      • Tim in Beloit

        JM,
        Are you hiring SO labor? You seem to hide from publicity concerning your status. You don’t go to jobs your firm is under contract to complete? I understand it would be had for business, but this is an effect of the perception of Wisconsin SOR itself. It reflects the bad policy in public broadcasts. Which rancher advertises the worst of his herd? Add to that doing it on world wide scale! Plain bad policy and WI had already learned that fact. Constanteneau 400 US 430.

        As an ex post (92) registrant, I’ve filed a discovery motion in FTR to bring to light the process utilized to create the registry per 1993 Act 98 (175.45…) I aim to put those involved on the witness stand in defense of FTR case. These cases operate as if revocation order is appropriate.
        The thing is DOC -20
        is the typical paper vehicle that affixes “strict liabilities” to convicts AND the dept. (DOC)
        It is the clerks stamp that renders DOC-20 judgment enforceable.- Per Sec.971,3 Without that form stamped by clerk enforcement is tenuous. I’m in Rock County and it’s about to go down. AG Doyle here I come.

        • Jm from WI

          @Tim
          Ihire from union halls. (Union contractor). I have had sex offenders sent to me by the hall who I have hired. As you know in Wisconsin there are issues with working in schools. I do not myself go into any schools because of this on any of my projects. I also do not go to projects where I am restricted. I have to turn in lists of employees including myself to be on certain government and private projects. We are vetted and weeded out and when I am weeded out I do not go to those jobs.

        • Tim in WI

          JM,
          You are not free to work,nor provide oversight in projects where you have a liberty interest.

        • R M

          At Tim: IDK if that was sarcasm or not but t say “You are not free to work,nor provide oversight in projects where you have a liberty interest.” is absolutely evil.

      • goyanks

        hey there. do you happen to be a contractor?

        • Tim in WI

          JM,
          I posted because I think I can help you. We live in the same state. The last part of first question to you explain how. DOC-20. Read yours thoroughly, note the statutes mentioned on the -20.

          I agree with the gentleman who noted the as he put it ” pure evil” behind your deprivation of liberty. You have the means to confront those by making a substantively due claim in the 2nd, based on Ramesch v WI. I estimate the simple claim is not more than4 pages of well thought out language. The DOC-20s typical purpose is key.

  5. USA

    I concur. Thats disgusting. Denying the man assistance is NOT Acceptable!

  6. Roger H

    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!)

    • Matt

      It isn’t always because a person doesn’t understand the law. But in order to curb-stomp these people at the Supreme Court level, we have to start at the bottom. Which appears to be happening all around the country now. If the lower courts are flooded with legit cases, eventually the whole scam collapses under its own weight. I hope I live long enough to see it happen. This is great progress, and I’m happy to see it. Asking a lawmaker to do the right thing is no different than asking a dog not to eat a steak that has been dropped on the floor. They can’t help themselves. It’s too easy. The courts are different. It’s not fail-safe. I am aware of that. But we have a better chance if we continuously point out that what the professional liars are doing is illegal and unconstitutional. So glad to see things going the way they are. It’s a good day.

  7. Jo

    We love you Janice and Co.

  8. Richard

    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.

  9. Mp

    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!

  10. B.S.

    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.

  11. Shawn

    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.

  12. mike r

    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

    • B.S.

      The housing section 8 for people who actually need it. How do they (the government) expect people who come out of prison or have low paying job or on disability to be able to find housing, they can afford it. Do they believe that Sex offenders don’t become disabled ? I guess they believe that sex offenders don’t age ??????

  13. Thanks!

    Thank you Janice. I’m glad we’re ACSOL members at $10/month. Everyone else, please join financially, too!

  14. Anonymous

    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.

  15. Worried in Wisconsin

    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.

    • NPS

      I bought a house with an FHA mortgage. Never an issue. In fact, being on the registry does not disqualify someone from getting any loan. Usually people with drug convictions are disqualified from getting loans.

      • Worried in Wisconsin

        It appears that I was incorrect…

        H.R.5072 – FHA Reform Act of 2010 was passed in the House but not in the Senate.

    • Count D.I.K.ula

      I hadn’t realized that we were barred from having amateur radio licenses. Makes me want to go on the air without a license and scandalize the airwaves. We could start our own network of hams. We’d be far more interesting than all the others who do nothing but talk about their equipment. I was briefly a ham when I was a kid but found the conversations tedious and pointless.

      “The FCC said that given “known risks of Amateur Radios in the hands of sex offenders, such misconduct is prima facie disqualifying, and has resulted in the loss of licenses in past cases.”

      “In focusing on the impact of Titus’s misconduct on his qualifications to hold an Amateur Radio license,” the FCC concluded, “we would be remiss in our responsibilities as a licensing authority if we continue to authorize Titus to hold an Amateur Radio license that could be used to put him in contact with children.”

      http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-reverses-alj-s-decision-revokes-convicted-sex-offender-s-amateur-radio-license

      • Harold

        @count D
        Thanks for your post….the end of the post FROM THE RADIO AUTHORITY AND THE BIGGEST PROBLEM ..
        the word “COULD” DO THIS OR THAT….SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED OR ACKNOWLEDGED !!!
        THKS

    • ma.concerned.citizen

      I was approved for an FHA mortgage 2 years ago. No issues at all. That’s a new one to me.

  16. Lake County

    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.

  17. Jon

    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.

    • James I

      Dear Jon:

      I have followed your case, (or maybe others in similar circumstances), with a growing dismay.

      Just a curious question…has your 6 year old daughter been formally adopted by the foster parents?

      Best Wishes, James I

      • Jon

        Yes, she was adopted immediately by the foster mom, who had prior working relationships with the people at CPS through her work at Radys Children’s hospital. Both her and the CPS worker were malicious in their lies, they even tried to claim my wife obviously has so kind of mental illness because she wanted to say with me, which made her unfit to be a mother. The judge didnt care about anything our side had to say, even when catching them in outright lies. He basically just rubber stamped whatever the CPS attorney spoon fed him.
        Want to talk about over zealous CPS workers? I caught the woman assigned our case camped outside our house on multiple occasions for hours on end, just trying to see if she could catch my wife coming over to see me, or anything else she felt she could possibly use against us.
        We have a recording of a guy who was assigned to my wife for a short while telling my wife that if she didnt leave and forget about me, then he would make sure she never got our daughter back, of course all in a suggestive manner.

        And they call me a criminal….

    • Janice Bellucci

      @Jon – I am very sympathetic to your situation, however, the reason I told you and your wife that I could not help you is that I am not a family law attorney and you need a family law attorney to help you regain the custody of your child. I told you this when we met. While I would like to help every person on the registry with every legal problem they have, I cannot and will not do so because if I did so I would be committing legal malpractice, harm my client and possibly lose my license to practice law. Many attorneys have specialties or at least a focus for their legal practice. The focus of my practice is civil rights and therefore I do not practice family law, trusts and estates, etc. Finding the right kind of lawyer is important just as finding the right kind of doctor. After all, you would not go to a dermatologist if you had a broken bone.

      • Jon

        I understand what you are saying, and two different family attorneys have each told us we need a civil rights attorney to have any hope of ever getting her back… any effort on the family court side wouldn’t go anywhere. The adoption is final, unless I somehow find a native American in my family tree.
        They said the only way to possibly overturn the termination of parental right and the adoption as well is to prove that our rights were violated, because we were never accused of any crime or neglect. They also said the other way to go after it is to prove that the law they used to do this to us is unconstitutional.
        So I have you saying I need a family attorney and they are saying our only hope is to find a civil rights attorney who is willing to take up our case.
        So who is right?
        That’s part of why we have been stuck in limbo because everyone keeps pointing at someone else because they don’t want to get involved. Weather its because of being too difficult, time consuming, or maybe they just dont like the idea of helping someone like me, take your pick.
        Everyone just keeps passing the buck, and here we are in limbo feeling alone and helpless.
        Its absolutely maddening.

        • wonderin

          Jon,
          I once gave you my opinion on your situation but it was ignored which is certainly your privilege but now that things have reached the inevitable conclusion, I will try to make you accept another mistake you’ve made and are paying the price for:
          When faced with the obvious loss of her child, her mother chose her relationship with you over her daughter. Naturally, the court sees her as an unfit mother and unable or unwilling to put her daughter’s best interest over her own.
          If your wife would have separated from you, I have no doubt the court would have allowed you supervised visitation rights in the company of the mother and perhaps eventually as a family.
          I have no way of knowing all the facts but it seems obvious when they have all the power you need to be flexible to keep from breaking.

        • R M

          @Jon: I was eventually able to get full unsupervised contact with my child (the victim). It took 7 years, so don’t give up. I went through family court using the docket from the divorce in which barred me from contact to the child. Even though a post-release condition of mine stated no contact with the victim, a judge overruled it. My case was not in Ca though; just trying to give you hope.

    • steve

      I went thru Children’s court. I got a very expensive family law lawyer and we fought a very angry and vindictive CPS worker who did her very best to try and keep us apart. In children’s court the child gets a court appointed lawyer and the best decision is made for the child.

  18. Mot

    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

    • Lake County

      No one here said a COR will automatically get you off the registry. It’s just an important 1st step. After the 3 tier system is in place, that COR should make it much easier to get relieved of having to register after the proper amount of time for your tier level. The COR is proof to any future Judge that you are rehabilitated and no longer a danger to society. Congratulations on getting your COR. Not everyone can get one. As laws keep changing and court battles continue, you might find that COR is priceless to you in the future.

    • New Person

      @ Mot,

      Congrats on earning your Certificate of Rehabilitation (CoR)! Unfortunately, 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:

      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.
      ***
      Link: https://www.wklaw.com/sex-offender-registration/ending-requirement-to-register/

      If you had a PC 664/288(a), then 288(a) is a sub-section of 288. That means you still have to register as it is identified as one of the offense that doesn’t remove you from the registry with the CoR (Certificate of Rehabilitation).

      You have two options from this point:
      i) Now that you’ve earned the CoR, then you can apply for a Governor’s Pardon.

      ii) Or you see where you are in the Tiered-system that goes into effect in Jan 1, 2021.
      Here’s the breakdown: (Link: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB384 )

      ****
      (c) The following persons shall register:
      Every person who, since July 1, 1944, has been or is hereafter convicted in any court in this state or in any federal or military court of a violation of Section 187 committed in the perpetration, or an attempt to perpetrate, rape or any act punishable under Section 286, 288, 288a, or 289, Section 207 or 209 committed with intent to violate Section 261, 286, 288, 288a, or 289, Section 220, except assault to commit mayhem, subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 236.1, Section 243.4, paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 261, paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 262 involving the use of force or violence for which the person is sentenced to the state prison, Section 264.1, 266, or 266c, subdivision (b) of Section 266h, subdivision (b) of Section 266i, Section 266j, 267, 269, 285, 286, 288, 288a, 288.3, 288.4, 288.5, 288.7, 289, or 311.1, subdivision (b), (c), or (d) of Section 311.2, Section 311.3, 311.4, 311.10, 311.11, or 647.6, former Section 647a, subdivision (c) of Section 653f, subdivision 1 or 2 of Section 314, any offense involving lewd or lascivious conduct under Section 272, or any felony violation of Section 288.2; any statutory predecessor that includes all elements of one of the offenses described in this subdivision; or any person who since that date has been or is hereafter convicted of the attempt or conspiracy to commit any of the offenses described in this subdivision.

      (d) A person described in subdivision (c), or who is otherwise required to register pursuant to the Act shall register for 10 years, 20 years, or life, following a conviction and release from incarceration, placement, commitment, or release on probation or other supervision, as follows:

      …(1) (A) A tier one offender is subject to registration for a minimum of 10 years. A person is a tier one offender if the person is required to register for conviction of a misdemeanor described in subdivision (c), or for conviction of a felony described in subdivision (c) that was not a serious or violent felony as described in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 or subdivision (c) of Section 1192.7.
      (B) This paragraph does not apply to a person who is subject to registration pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3).

      …(2) (A) A tier two offender is subject to registration for a minimum of 20 years. A person is a tier two offender if the person was convicted of an offense described in subdivision (c) that is also described in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5 or subdivision (c) of Section 1192.7, Section 285, subdivision (g) or (h)of Section 286, subdivision (g) or (h) of Section 288a, subdivision (b) of Section 289, or Section 647.6 if it is a second or subsequent conviction for that offense that was brought and tried separately.
      (B) This paragraph does not apply if the person is subject to lifetime registration as required in paragraph (3).

      …(3) A tier three offender is subject to registration for life. A person is a tier three offender if any one of the following applies:
      ……(A) Following conviction of a registerable offense, the person was subsequently convicted in a separate proceeding of committing an offense described in subdivision (c) and the conviction is for commission of a violent felony described in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5, or the person was subsequently convicted of committing an offense for which the person was ordered to register pursuant to Section 290.006, and the conviction is for the commission of a violent felony described in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5.
      ……(B) The person was committed to a state mental hospital as a sexually violent predator pursuant to Article 4 (commencing with Section 6600) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 6 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
      ……(C) The person was convicted of violating any of the following:
      …………(i) Section 187 while attempting to commit or committing an act punishable under Section 261, 286, 288, 288a, or 289.
      …………(ii) Section 207 or 209 with intent to violate Section 261, 286, 288, 288a, or 289.
      …………(iii) Section 220.
      …………(iv) Subdivision (b) of Section 266h.
      …………(v) Subdivision (b) of Section 266i.
      …………(vi) Section 266j.
      …………(vii) Section 267.
      …………(viii) Section 269.
      …………(ix) Subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 288.
      …………(x) Section 288.2.
      …………(xi) Section 288.3, unless committed with the intent to commit a violation of subdivision (b) of Section 286, subdivision (b) of Section 288a, or subdivision (h) or (i) of Section 289.
      …………(xii) Section 288.4.
      …………(xiii) Section 288.5.
      …………(xiv) Section 288.7.
      …………(xv) Subdivision (c) of Section 653f.
      …………(xvi) Any offense for which the person is sentenced to a life term pursuant to Section 667.61.

      ……(F) The person was convicted of violating subdivision (a) of Section 288 in two proceedings brought and tried separately.
      ****

      If I were you, then I’d try to get that Gov’s Pardon before the tiered system begins. Also, I’d try to figure out if there’s a difference between a straight 288(a) and a 664/288(a) in the new tiered system. You’re going to need a sex offender expert to help determine which tier you would belong.

      I hope that helps and, again, congrats on receiving the CoR. That’s a significant achievement on your behalf that will be of great support to getting off the registry. Good luck, Mot!

  19. Harry

    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.

    • wonderin

      @ Harry
      We couldn’t agree more. The Big Lie!
      I have been saying for years on this site that our biggest foe is not law enforcement but rather the bulk of the Psychological Community.
      They are the ones who have created the lie that sex offenders have little control over their sexual desires and that there is no cure.
      The actual truth is vastly different and much more complicated which is easily demonstrated by empirical evidence.
      It might be true , for instance, if someone has a sexual attraction to children that they can’t change but to claim they can’t learn to control their desires is preposterous and has been proven day after day for decades by the bulk of former offenders who are living responsible lives.

      In my opinion, it’s high time the leaders of the Psychological Community step forward and take responsibility by educating society and the courts for their mistakes in risk assessments regarding the majority of sex offenders and how a registry only harms the community as a whole.
      We must understand that right or wrong the court is obliged to consider the Psychological Community as experts on sexual behavior and until we can convince them to act responsibly we can never make any worthwhile strides in true justice or social rights.

  20. Illinois Contact

    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?

    • David

      @ Illinois Contact: Per this website’s 2020 Lobbying Day and Conference Dates announcement:

      “The primary focus of Lobby Day in 2020 will be to improve the Tiered Registry Law that takes effect in 2021,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. ”As currently written, the Tiered Registry Law unfairly assigns people to the highest tier, which requires lifetime registration, although they do not pose a current danger to society.”

      It is a top priority for ACSOL’s lobbying day to push to get CP convictions moved to a lower tier.

    • norman

      @illinois..today, 12.22.2019 we are tier 3..the bad of the bad..we are right there with svp’s..whether or not Janice can get us moved to tier 1 is a long shot..the politicians, law enforcement, and therapists seem to agree with the tier 3 designation..smfh in disbelief………………………….

      • Bill

        @Norman

        Could you clarify which state you are referring to about CP cases moving on to Tier 3 as of 12.22.2019?

        If you are referring to CA, I understand that the Tier system won’t be put into effect until 2021…unless something changed that I totally missed?

        • David

          @ Bill: No, you did not miss anything. You are correct. California’s Tiered Registry goes into effect January 2021.
          (I believe Norman is saying that, as it is currently written, CP is tier 3.)

  21. American Detained in America

    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.

    • Will Allen

      That fight is going pretty well. Would you mind telling all of us specifically what you are doing for it? Where is your line in the sand for that? I’m curious because I also want to join whatever is effective.

      Only corrupt, criminal regimes have $EX Offender Registries.

    • Bill

      @American Detained In America

      I understand that you are frustrated waiting for our American system to reform.

      Who isn’t?

      But has there been any time in our history that our justice system has turned 180 degrees on any crime issue over night? It took decades for it to reform some of the crack law issues since it took shape in the 80’s.

      This battle to take out the Registry is going to take awhile and the public narrative about Registrants is going to determine how quickly or how slowly it will happen.

      Janice being in the trenches of this battle knows better than anyone what the legal and political landscape is like and knows how to attack it with what little financial support we’re giving.

      We should count ourselves fortunate to have an advocate fighting for us. And to sleep through this while waiting for change is really a cop out that unfortunately many Registrants do.

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 *

.