ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Mar 7 – Berkeley, 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 – May 29/30 in Los Angeles

California

CASOMB Reports “Biggest Jump” in Number of Registrants

The number of people required to register as sex offenders in the state of California continues to grow at a rapid case, according to the CA Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB). That total number peaked at 109,379 as of January 8, 2020, which represents an increase of about 1,600 in only two months.

“This is the biggest jump in several years,” stated CASOMB Vice Chair Brenda Crowding of the CA Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

Of that total number, CASOMB reported that there are 78,981 registrants not in custody of which 16,809 are in violation for failure to report personal information, including but not limited to, their home address. CASOMB also reported that there are 6,761 registrants who are homeless and therefore required to register monthly as transients. Further, CASOMB reported that there are 6,554 registrants on parole of which 3,521 (about 54 percent) are considered high risk.

These reports were made during today’s public meeting of CASOMB. The board’s next public meeting will be held on Feb. 20 in the Board Room of the Board of State & Community Corrections, 2590 Venture Oaks Way, Sacramento 95833.

Join the discussion

  1. TP

    I wonder what the numbers would be if they tracked this kind of information for individuals convicted of other crimes. I’m not solely talking about the recidivism rates…

  2. USA

    Wow! The number out of compliance is staggering! The number homeless is staggering as well! This is clearly why Judges should be looking for reasons to grant those petitioning to be removed from the registry! Very disturbing

    • Tim in WI

      !RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!
      !YOU MUST COMPLY!

      Do you think it persuasive to a jury?

  3. Agamemnon

    I thought the list was supposed to stop crime. It almost seems like it’s pointless to oust people *after* a crime is committed rather than focus resources to *prevent* crime.

  4. Eric

    Uh…I don’t think the registry is…uh…working. I don’t think the numbers are supposed…you know…like…explode.

    • New Person

      I do not believe California will ever admit its mistake and will somehow continue to make the registry thrive by simply removing one legislation at a time by Janice. Or Janice could identify that if one part of the scheme is unconstitutional, then all of the scheme should be deemed unconstitutional like the other states have in Michigan and Pennsylvania.

      The dramatic and continued increase in registrants is blatantly identifying the registry isn’t preventing crimes as the registry continues to increase as evidence and proof. How abhorrent the move was from LE only access to world wide access, all based upon a lie of a statistic that still perpetuates today. California does have a “right to pursue and obtain privacy”, but it is not being pursued because the court system will not accept the “Frightening and High” research work by Ira and Tara Ellman that debunks the information utilized by the SCOTUS with respect to recidivism rates. Public protections would be deemed obnoxious when the recidivism rates presented by CASOMB is under 1%, far lower than the 20-year NJ study of 3%.

      I do thank Janice, Chance, and all of ACSOL to keep us all abreast of the tyranny that remains ongoing as the registries are virtual internment camps, with your mark directly noted on your passport and soon to be Real IDs.

  5. David

    Extended out, that’s roughly a 10% increase per year and a doubling of the Registry’s size in 10 years’ time.
    But let’s double another number as well: 30,000+ non-compliant (FTR). Wow.

    (Just imagining…… at some point, on a designated day, we should all stage a massive, peaceful act of civil disobedience……. On a designated Sunday morning [when there are no children present and when we cannot attend a church of our choosing (because there may be children in a Sunday school there)], we should all peacefully congregate in protest on the grounds of designated local schools throughout California and all be simultaneously arrested for violating one of the many restrictions imposed on us.
    How would our California Justice system deal with an instant 100,000 person increase in arrests? …. What if such a Registry protest were Nationwide…… on one single designated Sunday, in every community … while the “good folks” are all in church [from which we good folks are banned]…. a million people across the country, all arrested one quiet Sunday morning in a peaceful civil disobedience protest against the Registries…..)

    • Anonymous

      @David = You know how law enforcement & the justice system work. They will arrest but not all. And then make an example out of him (not her). Horrible punishment & smeared all over the news. And then dare us to try it again. Anyone game?

    • Bill

      @David

      Also add family and loved ones affected by the Registry and you could easily triple that number.

    • Maestro

      I’ve been saying this for the longest time. The cops can not arrest hundreds of thousands of people and there certainly are not enough beds in the jails for such numbers.
      But here’s the problem- Registrants are too scared to make such a stand/protest. Ok, so what about the families of these scared registrants? They’re effected by this crap also so THEY should be part of the protest.
      People like this and their families should be out there protesting:
      https://tftr.narsol.org/2019/12/15/juvenile-s-v-p/?unapproved=43044&moderation-hash=97ba2eeec58762a7107951ab76a3ffce#comment-43044

      They can’t and won’t be able to arrest everyone.

    • Steve

      That is a terrible idea, while some people maybe well meaning, the media would paint it as a demand for sex offenders to have access to children. They would then just open up tent cities at over crowded prisons to handle the influx! Others who make the laws would then say I told you so and come up with more draconian laws. The best way for us to fight back is to not repeat the mistakes of the past.

  6. Waste of time

    So according to them, approx. 3% of registrants are actually considered a risk. Is this not proof that the registry is a for profit industry? 106,000 people not considered a risk to public safety, but still required to suffer mentally, financially and physically in order to maintain a perverse justice system.

  7. Terrald

    Well, it just means time to do more trimming. While the new tier system is an improvement, it still makes it worse for others…specifically those convicted of cp offenses. Move them down to tier 1 and reduce their time on the registry. Athough we eventually need to get rid of the whole regime, the state can still keep taking steps instead of complaining about a big jump in registrants….like oh I thought we took care of the problem with the upcoming reform

  8. CA cool RC

    Maybe we should do something EPIC on our Lobby Day on Tuesday, February 11, in Sacramento to bring attention to this matter.
    Maybe create a headline
    Mass RC protest Megan Law in Sac.

    We could go to the Capital and hang out there after our Lobby Day. Maybe we have couple speakers like we did at Carson city hall.

    I am not sure if a small protest will work. but something to bring attention.

  9. @Anonymous

    Really? Make an example out of “him (not her)”. Well, I wish someone would’ve said that to Orange County because I am most definitely a her and my name/face smeared all over the news and convicted.

    I know quite a few people posting on here that are very anti-woman because they think this is only happening to men. No. It’s happening to us all.

    • C

      That’s sad to hear, yet refreshing as well….

      I always wondered how life goes for the women who get convicted? My ex and co-defendant is having a great life. Got a great job right after getting out, got caught violating the restraining orders in place, INCLUDING living with our victim, and now one of my other kids say they think they are banging it out again… She was never charged for the violations…. She lives in a really nice home, with acreage and while she appears on her state’s public website, my kids say there has never been any vandalism, harassment or discrimination.

      I do not wish her to suffer, but……

      So I guess it’s nice to see some women feel the same pain as the men, although if we were to all be treated equal, I would hope we could all be treated better. I know I treat others MUCH better now than I did before I became a pariah.

      • Deborah Martinez

        @C:
        I am sorry your co-defendant continues to do things and get the lessor effects of punishment. But please do not compare her actions as a template for how other female registrants are treated. My sister has been a registrant for 22 years now. She was 19 when her boyfriend was 15 2 days shy of 16. They were not sexually active, but dated. Long story short, she did 13 months in jail, harassed daily, and for the entire term. I won’t indulge the nightmares that I think both MALE AND FEMALE offenders suffer in jail, she lost every single job due to the registry and sadly, most female jobs are all background checked. Male offenders have the job advantage due to their abilities and talents in areas of plumbing, construction, computers etc., but again, both sexes suffer and suffer when they should not! The stereotyping with offenders is resentment from male offenders thinking women get treated easier. Not true at all! Society likens that mentality to the hot school teacher arrested for sex with her student and the male offender cruising around in a van preying on children. This is not the typical offender. Most are one time offenders caught doing something far from sick, predator instinct like, to simple one time mistakes. Sorry C, there are many female offenders whom suffer BIG TIME. Loss of family, jobs, friends, self-esteem, dignity. And I know many males suffer the same fate. We are all in this fight together, remember that. Jeffery Epstein got favorable treatment as well. This does not equate to male offenders being treated softer. It’s rare situations where one sex benefits over the other. I pray all of you stay safe and have peace. Deborah

  10. Dustin

    I wonder how much of the increase is because of those CP entrapment stings. Betting pretty significant.

  11. Truth Be Told

    “High risk” my ass. You can thank the Static 99R scam for the HRSO label. As for CASOMB: I would never trust them one bit!

  12. USA

    I’m wondering who even thought of this registration process. I can maybe understand the process for someone who committed a heinous crime, but many people are being required to register for misdemeanors! This is nuts. Worst case scenario, there should be a simple process for getting off the registry if you fulfill certain parameters! The one thing I would suggest is, if (I processed my own/it’s not too difficult) you can, get your charge reduced to a misdemeanor and expunged! Furthermore, LE might be a bit more aggressive this year with compliance checks in order to keep you registering! My last (I verified via the phone/asked questions/OC/very professional) compliance, they simply called me. I think the entire process is a mess. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t support registering, but you have to give something to get something in return. Register while on probation? Parole? Ideas? Also, I was under the impression Static 99 was invalid after 10 years?

    • David

      @ USA: California has had a Registry for a very, very long time. It began as a registry to keep track of homosexuals.
      Las Vegas has also had a Registry for a very long time. Theirs began as a way to keep track of visiting mobsters.

  13. @C

    Oh don’t get me wrong. I’ve done very well for myself. I went to graduate school, earned my MA, I have a great career where I’m earning much more than I did before I was charged and convicted. I also bought a house. Of course it helps not being on a public registry, but the articles are still out there.

    Where I’m lacking is in a relationship. I just don’t trust men at all. I have been sexually harassed so much due to my status as if I’m somehow deserving of that treatment; as if I don’t have a right to complain about any type of sexual misconduct. Very ironic as well. My status has created RC type behavior by those not on the registry.

    But hey, I guess that’s refreshing for you to hear, right?

  14. USA

    @C, we are similar. MBA, home etc. I have a few crazy neighbors and I’ve bit my lip a few times. With a COR, they interview neighbors. Do they do this with a SB 384? I live in an upscale area where one nice guy drinks and likes to start confrontations! The other is narcistic/stares you down and flips you off as you drive by! Neighbor (I’m not online) knows I’m on the registry. I just ignore them. Had I not been on the registry, I would have taken legal action. I know handle things differently: I’ll stand outside (with 2 female neighbors) and just watch as he (narcissus) falls apart and goes inside (rather then blow his debris all over my lawn! Not happened again. You have to out think him

    • someone who cares

      USA ~ Where did you find that neighbors are interviewed when applying for a COR? How can that be constitutional ( I know what really is when it comes to Registrants )? If someone is not on the public site, it can’t be legal to interview neighbors prior to being allowed the COR since that is the whole idea about not being public, NOT BEING PUBLIC. Can someone chime in on this?

  15. USA

    Yes, investigators questioned a few neighbors about what kind of neighbor I was? What if I had a neighbor issue? What if a neighbor disliked me? What if I have gossiper neighbors? What if one made up a story? What if I had a bully neighbor? Can they bring them to court? Will this be the norm with SB 384? This new law clearly requires updates!

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 *

.