ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: April 18 – Phone,
May 29/30 – Conference (Los Angeles),  June 13 – Sacramento details

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

2020 ACSOL Conference – Ticket Sales Halted

California

CA DOJ Releases New Information About Tiered Registry Law

The California Department of Justice (CA DOJ) has released new information regarding the Tiered Registry Law in the form of Answers to Frequently Asked Questions. A similar document was issued by the agency about two years ago. A link to a copy of the new document is below and can also be found on the website of the Office of the California Attorney General.

According to the new information, registrants will be able to request their “tier notification letters” from the local law enforcement agency where they register after January 1, 2021. Individuals who disagree with their tier assignment are advised by CA DOJ to consult with either their local public defender’s office or a private attorney.

“It is unfortunate that CA DOJ has chosen not to issue proposed regulations implementing the tiered registry law,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “The process of issuing proposed regulations would allow much needed comments from the public, including registrants and their loved ones.”

According to CA DOJ, a registrant could be placed in a “tier-to-be-determined” category if their tier designation cannot be immediately ascertained. Examples of such individuals include those convicted in another state or in a military court. Registrants could remain in this category for up to 24 months and during that time, they would not be eligible to petition for removal from the registry.

Registrants who are eligible to petition for removal from the registry may begin to do so on July 1, 2021. Petitions are to be filed with a superior court in the county where the registrant currently resides and served upon both local law enforcement as well as the district attorney’s office.

The final decision regarding whether a registrant will be removed from the registry will be made by a Superior Court Judge. If a judge grants a registrant’s petition, the registrant is no longer required to register, however, it could take CA DOJ up to 90 days to send the registrant a letter “indicating your registration requirement has been fully terminated.”

https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/csor/registrant-faqs.pdf

 

Join the discussion

  1. Eric

    Being a hopeless optimist in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence I will try to find something positive in this. First, it is better than life on the registry across the board for all –thank you Governor Brown and all those that supported the tiered registry. Secondly, it does appear there is some wiggle room here, and it appears that not everything is set in stone. Long ago ACSOL said this would be a work in progress and that is what it appears to be. Unfortunately, as usual, the politicians seem to like to do things behind closed doors with out the input of those annoying people who they represent and who pay their over inflated salary. But the overarching optimism I find is that we have Janice and the ACSOL staff who are more knowledgeable in this effort than anyone and they are on our side…so I remain reservedly optimistic.

    • dph

      Ditto Eric! Ditto.
      Being positive, it might not help most of those but may change for actual releases years or time later on.
      Janice Chance & Team may be able to change and be more inclusive of those who have been patient!

  2. Bay Area RC

    Huh, I just posted a question about this a few days ago.

    And my understanding was that for the tier 2 that didn’t get a static-99 score, we might have to wait 22 years.

    Looks like we can request so we don’t have to wait up to 24 months to get our assigned tiers.

    • SR

      The additional 24 months is for people moving into the state with out of state convictions, as well as at the start of the new registry launch for those with convictions prior to the Static-99 score being a thing. So if you’re T2 with a 30-year-old conviction, it’s likely that you’ll have to wait until possible 2023 to file for relief. Static-99 score is one of the qualifying factors for being placed for majority of non-CP possession cases (those convicted of CP possession, PC 311.11, do not have or get a Static-99 as it wasn’t calibrated for those without a “direct” victim). Of course as with the whole registry at the moment, no one really knows what they’ll actually do.

      • X12

        So for those of us who have been on the list for years(since 1998 for me), we’re being punished more so than people who’ve been on it for less time in that we will basically be put into a “TBD” category since the Static 99 wasn’t yet established at the time of our crimes? Is that automatic, that without a Static 99, they will not place us into a Tier in the beginning? How the hell was that part not opposed? Based on the Tier’s and time it takes to petition to be removed, many of us would be eligible to be removed immediately, but someone thought it would be a good idea to not allow it since the Static 99 test wasn’t available when we committed our crimes? This just keeps getting better and better…

        Does anyone know if that’s going to be addressed prior to it going in effect?

        • Carey

          I am a level 1 (lowest tier) assighed by a Superior Court Judge in New York in very late 2010… i have to be registered for 20 years, so will not get my freedom back until very late 2030! What tier are most CP cases expected to receive in California, and will it speed up my release from the Registry if I were to move out to California!??

      • Chester M

        Anyone who would be theoretically eligible for tier two and eligible to be removed in 2021 would have to have been convicted no later than 2001 before the static 99. So this seem like it will be a common issue for the first years.

      • Static

        Where is this in the statue about the static-99 and another 2 years before a petition is available? Why be eligible to petition after another 2 years?

        • Interested Party

          @Static, I am not lawyer, however in looking up your question I found the applicable section. Please see the new law section as described …
          290(d)(5)(A) is the part about a undetermined static score and 290(d)(5)(B) is the part about having 24 months to determine the proper tier placement.

          All that said, it remains to be determined how the DoJ will deal with people that do not have a static score when the law goes into effect. The worse case scenario is that someone in this situation will have to wait an additional 24 months.

        • Static

          I don’t see it. Here is

          “(5) (A) The Department of Justice may place a person described in subdivision (c), or who is otherwise required to register pursuant to the Act, in a tier-to-be-determined category if his or her appropriate tier designation described in this subdivision cannot be immediately ascertained. An individual placed in this tier-to-be-determined category shall continue to register in accordance with the Act. The individual shall be given credit for any period for which he or she registers towards his or her mandated minimum registration period.”

          And I think that is an extension of (4)(A) pertaining to out of state offenses, meaning the DOJ would have 24 months to resolve if out of state offenses are compatible with CA statues or not. Someone entering the state may have the risk assessment applied to them (4)(A)(b)(i). Coming into the state would initiate the risk assessment. The Static-99 is supposedly subject to timing-out and therefore no longer accurate after so many years (5?) of being offense free. That’s my reading anyway and I could be wrong, but I don’t think risk assessments would be retroactive for all going back decades.

        • Interested Party

          @static

          Once again, I am not lawyer, so this is just my best guess. I hope I am wrong and you are correct.

          Points 1,2,3, etc all relate to the point above them in this case (d), so they are related but are independent. So for your interpretation I think (5) would have to be a subset of (4) for it to only apply to out of state. As an example, if a person falls under (3) the tier three description, it does not matter if they fall under (1) or (2) they will be subject to tier 3.

          The main purpose to (5) is the qualifier that anyone who’s tier is not immediately ascertained. This is a potential area where DOJ can mess with people who did not have a risk assessment conducted at the time of release.

          For many people risk assessments were not required/or even possible. I hope that the DoJ would use the information available to make a determination, but remain cautious about how this will be implemented for people without a risk assessment.

        • Static

          @Interested Party

          I’m not a lawyer either. Seems to me the vast majority would not have a risk assessment done since it is fairly new, but there could be complications in rap sheets that pertain to those who are not from out of state. There had to be a way to accommodate those unusual cases where it is not possible to decipher what pertinent statues to calculate or if parts of the rap sheets were missing, for example. The DOJ would have to ask the court(s) to resubmit the disposition forms and some may have been destroyed or lost, especially for misdemeanors. So I agree with your point there. Where we differ is on the risk assessment. I don’t see anywhere where it says there ALWAYS has to be a risk assessment before petitioning is allowed. I suspect that would have to be explicit. It could be a good idea to obtain copies of rap sheets to check for accuracy. There are many sites that explain how to do it and how to read them.

        • Interested Party

          @ Static

          Sounds like we are in more agreement then disagreement.

          I think it would be a huge error for the DoJ to hold up many people’s tier designation based on the risk evaluation. That sad, I think there is a potential that the DoJ could do it.

          It is that potential which fuels people’s instance that they will have to wait an additional two years to get their tier designation. I understand the assumption that DoJ will always take action in the way that will cause me the most difficulty, but it is not set in stone.

          We will all know when the tiers decisions are finally announced. I hope and also think it is most likely that not having a risk assessment will not lead to an additional 2 years of limbo.

  3. KM

    Still so many questions..

    If I’ve moved out of state for 10 years, where I am not required to register- do I still have to wait 10 more years to apply for removal if I move back to California?

    I haven’t had to register since moving out of California. Will they post my info on Megan’s Law website even if I dont live there?

    Who can I go to ask these questions?

    • RUBEN

      Were did you go were you didn’t have to register?

      • KM

        New York. There is no equivalent statute to the “Annoying a minor under 18,” here. And since it’s not a felony in California the board here found I wasn’t required to register.

    • D

      I’ve spoken to the US Marshall office I believe it was and asked them every question I could think of. You do not have to be in the state you were convicted in for the 10 years to count. As long as 10 calendar years have passed with no hiccups you are good to petition no matter where you have been living.

  4. Will Allen

    Yep, keep polishing up that pile of crap that is the Registries. It’s “protecting” so many children and will only get better. I’m glad I’ve never needed Nanny Big Government to “help” me fake protect my family.

    Frankly, if these criminal regimes had any sense or clue, they’d be falling all over themselves to remove nearly everyone from their Registries. But they don’t. They are too stupid to know they should and too arrogant to care.

    For me personally, I’ve been listed for so long that it hardly matters to me these days. They can keep me listed or not, I’m not going to let it affect me much. But I am going to continue to really, really harm them every day. I am going to continue to add to their casualties. So I have to say that I dare them to keep me listed. I especially dare them to keep harassing me. I’ve proven they’ve lost and it’s only going to get worse for them. Sad.

    Reality: The $EX Offender Registries are nothing but a giant pile of excrement. They are clearly not needed or beneficial. That is trivial to prove. There is nothing legitimate about them. They are nothing but harassment by out-of-control Nanny Big Government and the emperor never had any clothes. They are all liars.

  5. CA Cool RC

    I think we should keep on suing until the Megan’s law falls apart.

    • Carey

      How many suits have been successful, and what were the specifics regarding their cases?

    • Clark

      This. I hope this is the case, just like what ACLU did in MI. Some concerns include what happens to those who are 290 but were never published on the Megan’s Law website? 10+ years no publication, no problems, rebuilding life, now this “improved” law comes along to threaten over a decade of rebuilding a new life. Like what someone else said once the toothpaste is out of the tube, there’s no putting it back in. Honestly, this new law is kind of troubling to say the least . . .

  6. USA

    Big Question: are tiers based upon original conviction/plea? Or, resolution. What about charges reduced to a misdemeanor? Expunged? There is a big difference between a felony and misdemeanor sexual battery? According to attorneys I’ve reached out to, a PC 17B (felony reduced to a misdemeanor) is for all intense purposes a misdemeanor. There are questions about felony expunged? Or, misdemeanor expunged? Happy New Year!

  7. Matthew

    Still no word on how 1203.4 will affect tiers since the law says you are no longer charged with a crime for the most part.

  8. ReadyToFight

    Sooooo sick of the flaming hoops. We’re the only ones getting burned. The goddamn goal post is forever in motion backwards. What’s that? You want off after TWENTY YEARS???? Ok…you can “ask politely” and we’ll see. Oh but wait 2 more years for this…and another 2yrs more for that. Goddam this State and the scumbags that run it.
    And furthermore I hope to see us all band together for those of us nearby being harassed by “neighbors” and making their lives miserable for their vigilante bullshit.

  9. HopingforHope

    This is going to be interesting. On July 1, 2021, they start accepting petitions. Six months later, you go up on the Megan’s website, which could be catastrophic for many thousands of people who have re-built their lives, particularly those whose offenses were decades ago. So, that gives us a six month window. Appropriate measures must be put in place to ensure that those who get relief do NOT wind up on the website either by mistake or because the DOJ is unable to move quickly enough to prevent that from happening. Once you’re up, the toothpaste is out of the tube. It goes everywhere. You will never be able to catch up with all of the publishers out there who will make a lot of money off of this by splattering your name and picture all over the internet, and we all know that anyone seeing it will view you as some sort of imminent threat.

  10. Matthew

    Sent an e-mail asking about expungments and 17b… this was their response:

    Please be advised, for your convenience we’ve enclosed our “frequently asked questions” document regarding Senate Bill (SB) 384, tiered sex offender registration. Unfortunately, the California Department of Justice cannot provide you any legal advice concerning SB 384. Therefore, if you have any questions regarding your tier status or petitions for termination from the registry, we recommend you contact a public defender’s office or a private attorney.

    Thank you,

    //AR//
    Department of Justice
    California Sex Offender Registry

  11. USA

    Matthew, I had the same response about 1 year ago. Disturbing. I contacted a few attorneys and everyone had the same response. PC 17B is pretty clear. It’s a misdemeanor if/when granted. I think (I’m not a lawyer) the PC 1203.4 might be different (ie: felony just expunged). This is why (websites) lawyers recommend the 17B and then expungement. I was (crazy) stopped after my plea years ago /I had 3 months to voluntarily turn myself in and was detained. Something showed in the system? I did a PC 858.1 as well granted. FYI

    • Matthew

      We will definitely see about 1203.4. I think attorneys push for 17b if available because it stores all rights, guns. 1203 dismisses the charge but one still has to register based on 290 instead of the charge. I can see if go to tier 1 to be honest. No longer do you hold the charge but instead the title if that makes sense

  12. ab

    Well that’s just delightful!

    Everyone who should know the answer to a question either doesn’t or refuses to answer. Anyone who wants to do something is told “wait and see”. When inquiring about how long of a wait “not sure, but when possible you can ask again” .

  13. American Detained in America

    I tried and I tried and I tried to warn everyone not to trust this. Now you’re seeing why. Incrementally isn’t going to work in our favor. The only thing that will ever work in our favor, the only thing to support is to take it all down.

    The sex offender registry needs to end, pure and simple.

  14. Bill

    @American Detained in America

    What strategy do you propose to take down the entire Registry if you believe that incrementalism won’t work?

    • Will Allen

      I have a strategy that would definitely have a huge effect. The effect would probably be good overall, but hey, who knows?

      I’d describe it but ACSOL surely won’t let me. It’s like they are afraid of just talking about just ideas, at least if they judge them to be toxic. I think if you are afraid to talk about things, you are hiding reality.

      • Bill

        @Will

        Put your ideas on other platforms like YouTube or even a podcast if you think ACSOL won’t let you publish here. Then tell us where to watch or listen.

        You’re not limited.

        • Will Allen

          Yep. I could do my own website as well, of course. Meh, I’m very conflicted these days. I’m pretty tired of all the talking by myself and everyone else. I know the only thing I’m satisfied with these days is actual action. I’m going to continue to wage guerilla warfare. Much of that probably shouldn’t be written down. The Registries must cost as much as possible.

        • Bill

          @Will Allen

          “I’m pretty tired of all the talking by myself and everyone else.”

          You? Really? For how long? A minute? Hour? Day?

          I give you a weekend before you spill your bile all over this forum.

          You’ve been angry for so long, over many forums it’s become pathological for you. That itch will come back…

        • Will Allen

          @Bill:

          Yeah, I didn’t mean stop talking. See what I mean about jumping to conclusions?

          I’m doing a lot besides talking. In fact, I retaliate every day. But really what I was referring to is that I’m impatient even with that retaliation. I feel the need to seriously step it up. It can be done. And if everyone did what I’ve done, there is no doubt that things would be different.

          So that’s really what I’m tired about. People talking and talking and really affecting nothing in reality.

          Everyone wants to be all nice and talk to the Nazis like they are legitimate. Obviously hasn’t worked for decades.

          I’m sorry you don’t like hate. I don’t either. Maybe you just shouldn’t read it so you can stay in your happy place? Talk with people about all the features of the Registries and its rules, regulations, etc. The Registries are pretty awesome, you know.

          Today, I will take actions that impact people in reality.

        • Bill

          @Will Allen

          “Yeah, I didn’t mean stop talking. See what I mean about jumping to conclusions?”

          I was being facetious. Unfortunately you can’t make text sound facetious…

          We know you won’t stop all the sudden on this forum or any other. I think it’s good therapy anyway for you to vent here or otherwise you’ll collapse from a brain anuerysm.

        • TP

          @will

          I have specifically asked you for what you are actively doing to take down the registry, and have yet to get a straight answer with details. Specific actions and all i have gotten are that you have established friends and relationships with people, but they dont know your status. You have also said you are causing the “registry natzis’ money, but am unsure how and really am unsure how that helps our cause. I guess what I am getting at is all I see if you is that “talking” you refer to.

          The only way things will change is two ways which have work together. First, public perception and opinion must change through education about truth into situations. Laws are made based on public wants and needs. The people then have to speak up and act. Second, the courts must enforce the constitution and preserve the rights of everyone, holding politicians accountable to make just and correct laws. We have to fight on both fronts.

          Accountability is important in all of this. Politicans who do not follow the will of the people must lose their jobs by not reelected. Judges in CA are elected too!

          Perfect example is the new AB5 law in CA, championed by our “friend” Lorena Gonzales-Fletcher. It has pisaed off a lot of Californians as it has drastically effected their jobs. Well, the way to “fix it” is to not only get that law changed, but work to get Ms. Gonzalez not reelected…. we now can get people to help us in this as she is our enemy!

          As the Washington Post headline reads, “democracy dies in darkness.” Simply the people are being kept in the dark, and politicians are following the will of the people based on what they the people to believe. It’s Platos allegory of the cave in action with the media projecting the images for the people to see on the wall. We as a people must unite, and change those images. We have to lobby as RSOs, inform the public and have them lobby alongside all of us.

          In my short time apart of this situation (and I might add, I am a victim of society in this because I maintain my innocence as related to the law), I have already been openly speaking to people around me about the truth of not only my situation, but the truth about RSOs. I am already getting people to start writing letters to politicians and share information with others. Theae are active steps to change things.

  15. CA

    I have contacted my attorney also regarding penal code 17b, and the same answer he also gave me!
    “Once the felony conviction has been reduced to a misdemeanor; IT IS A MISDEMEANOR FOR ALL PURPOSES!
    So if you have had your felony reduced to a misdemeanor then you are a Tier 1 offender.

  16. New Person

    After reading that FAQ, 7-page pdf, I have questions aside from what others have already brought up.

    Point 1. If a registrant has a non-California conviction for which they are no longer required to register in the state of conviction, they may still be required to register in California

    What?! This doesn’t make any sense b/c the crime was not done in California. And if a person is no longer required to register in the state of conviction, then how are they a “registrant” still? So California law can supersede another state’s judgement/adjudication? For example, let’s say Nevada has an age of consent of 17, but California has an age of consent at 18. Does not this potentially mean any one who had sex at 17 or with a 17 year old will have to register in California when that person moves here?

    Point 2. Each state/jurisdiction has their own sex offender registration requirements; therefore, the CA DOJ cannot confirm a registrant’s requirement to register as a sex offender in another state/jurisdiction. Registrants should contact the sex offender registry for the appropriate state/jurisdiction for additional information about registration requirements in that state/jurisdiction

    This is the opposite direction of Point 1. If I am de-registered in California, that does not mean I am de-registered in another state? What?! This means I potentially have to virtually petition off of every state or US protectorate that I move into? I don’t know how this makes sense. How is Point 1 or Point 2 not considered double jeopardy?

    Does this also mean we’re all perpetually non-removable from the IML?

    Once you’re off the registry doesn’t necessarily mean you’re off the registry b/c you could be forced to register in another state. This is an abuse of power as well as crosses into cruel and unusual punishment. This is supposed to be statutory, but now this new law leaves the potentiality of perpetual registration forever. What is the point of getting off the registry then?

    Point 3. The CA DOJ cannot provide legal assistance. If assistance is required, a registrant may contact the local public defender’s office or a private attorney.

    CA DOJ is writing these laws. Why cannot they provide legal assistance? Why are we forced to either pay for a private attorney or hope to get a good public offender? If this is statutory and the tiers designate who fits where as well as sets up the requirement of time, then why are we being re-judged again? The test here is time. According to CDCR/Probation, they considered 5-years of not accruing any new infractions would designate an individual rehabilitated. Why isn’t this a simple “check the box” requirements to get off the registry? Instead, you have to do all that and hope you don’t get a too biased judge.

    Judges still carry animus about the registrant class. Judges still believe that registrants are always on the hunt. How are we going to be protected against biased judges when the law does not recognize that registrants have the lowest recidivism rates brought about by CASOMB and the research work by Dr Ira and Tara Ellman on “Frightening and High”.

    Also, if the judge does adjudicate you can de-register, the judge’s adjudication could me absolutely nothing due to Point 1 or Point 2.

    I’m mystified at the lack of definitive judgement of de-registering!

    • TP

      Where did you get the info/comment that CDCR/Probation says they considered after 5 years of incident free to be rehabilitated?

      • New Person

        My lawyer told it to me, but I don’t recall the specific case he was citing.

    • David

      Please note:. CDCR and CA DOJ are NOT writing any regulations for the future tiered registry. They are only providing is FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) which obviously does not have the same standing …. or any standing at all(!?) …. in a court of law as actual regulations would.

  17. Matthew

    1203.4 sets aside the conviction and for all purposes of law, states it was dismissed. It doesn’t relieve you to register but you can put no on most applications that you were convicted of anything and employers cant use it on background checks. IF approved, it may drop you from megans law like it did me.

    • Mot

      Still seeing some confusion…I have a Cert of Rehab (COR) and if I am reading what I have seen on here the COR ‘presumes’ a 1203.4 since my offense was in 2001. I have been told I still have to resister but also that in 2021 I can take the COR to a judge and get relief from registering and Megan Website…can I also say NO when asked about convictions?? Oh, mine was a sting with a 664/288(a).

      • Interested Party

        @Mot,

        The 1203.4 had to be granted in order for you to apply for your CoR. Please check your documentation or consult with the public defender that helped you to make sure you have all of the paperwork.

        About the job application … if you have the 1203.4 then you can say that you are not convicted of a crime. However, for specific jobs if they ask have you ever been convicted of a crime then you have to state you were convicted, and the conviction has been dismissed.

        Having the CoR does is not a guarantee that your future petition to be relieved from registering will be granted. It is assumed that it will make the decision much simpler an straightforward. The court has already declared you are rehabilitated, but until it actually happens be ready for anything.

        • Mike

          A pc 17b is for felony wobblers and you have to have been sent to jail not prison, there’s one more qualification but i forgot what it is. But pc 17b. It must be a wobbler and you were sent to jail not prison.

  18. USA

    You guys need to get your info straight. You need (if necessary) to get your charge reduced to a misdemeanor PC 17B and then expunged PC 1203.4. If a judge (in Ca) grants a COR, this will be sent to the DOJ, which in turn will send you a document relieving to to register! If you obtain a COR, your no longer required to register!

    Certificate of rehabilitation

    The second option for clearing your sex offender status is to apply for a California certificate of rehabilitation. Unlike an expungement, a certificate of rehabilitation relieves your duty to register under Penal Code 290s Sex Offender Registration Act.33

    You may apply for a California certificate of rehabilitation seven to ten years following your release from custody or from parole or probation (whichever is sooner)34 if you meet the following requirements:

    the court expunged your case,
    you have not been incarcerated since your case was dismissed,
    you are not on probation for the commission of any other felony, and
    you can prove that you have lived in California for at least five years prior to your application.35

    • Mot

      USA I have to take exception to you statement about a COR in CA, I recently received one in Los Angeles County and the judge and on the Cert itself it states that I DO HAVE TO CONTINUE TO REGISTER. I have applied to the CA DOJ for removal from the MEGAN site and it is still pending

    • Matthew

      Not sure why you would say you need to get stuff right. We said the same thing. I have a 1203.4 so I know the drill there pal. USA get some counseling before you explode

    • Interested party

      @ USA, I wish it were as simple as you state. The following link is the application for a CoR for the county of San Diego.

      http://www.sdcourt.ca.gov/pls/portal/docs/PAGE/SDCOURT/GENERALINFORMATION/FORMS/CRIMINALFORMS/PKT016.PDF

      If you read it, you will see only some sex offenses are relieved of the obligation. Please see 290.5 which states explicitly which codes can be relieved if the CoR is granted.

  19. USA

    Matt, I might suggest not judging others. Especially on this site. I was in shock the guy was still registering, Interesting party is correct. There are select registerable offenses that are no longer required to register after a COR.

  20. NotReal

    As I’m sure you must know, just because they do not adopt regulations, it doesn’t mean they cannot adopt an illegal underground regulation.

  21. Mike

    Hello, a pc 17b The felony conviction must be what is known as a “wobbler.”
    2You must have been given probation, and not sent to state prison. If you served any time in state prison you are not eligible to reduce your felony. County jail is not state prison.
    3If you were convicted of any other felonies in the same case, then all felonies must be eligible for reduction or none of them are. Thats the info i found, hope it helps

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 *

.