ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (3/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings


CASOMB Discusses Tiered Registry Implementation, Registry Increases

The California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) discussed two major topics today during its monthly meeting — implementation of the Tiered Registry and continued increases to the number of individuals required to register.

During the meeting, the board members were told that the California Department of Justice (DOJ) will assign all individuals required to register to a tier under the Tiered Registry Law. Information regarding the tier assignments will be sent electronically by DOJ to local law enforcement agencies no later than January 1, 2021. Registrants must request their tier assignment from the local law enforcement agency where they register after that date.

According to one CASOMB member, the County of Los Angeles estimates that at least 1,700 people in that county will petition for removal from the registry on July 1, 2021, the first day petitions can be filed. The board member expressed concern that there may not be adequate resources to review 1,700 petitions within 60 days as required by the Tiered Registry Law.

Due to a strong expression of interest about implementation of the Tiered Registry during today’s meeting, the leader of CASOMB asked CA DOJ to make an expanded formal presentation to the board on this topic in the near future.

Also during the meeting, CASOMB members reported that the number of registrants continues to increase albeit at a slower pace than was reported last month. The total number of people required to register in California is 109,627, an increase of about 250 during the past month. Of that total, there are 79,212 registrants who are in the community, that is, who are not in custody, including 6,772 registrants who are homeless. In addition, it was reported that there are 16,819 registrants who are in violation due to their failure to register.

Another CASOMB member reported that there are a total of 117,479 people in custody in the state of California. In addition, it was reported that there are 6,517 registrants on parole.

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.  
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Here is one simple solution to getting group ; not sure the size; but if there is a way for those of us with a COR to just submit simple forms or copies of the COR and then be removed from the registry. Not sure if they want to hear from RSO.

I was told by someone that specializes in getting CORs that as of January 1, 2021, anyone on the registry can no longer get relief from having to register with a COR.

“as of January 1, 2021, anyone on the registry can no longer get relief from having to register with a COR.” That doesn’t make any sense since no one can apply off the registry until July 1, 2021. That’s a six month window that some people can get their petition looked at and can also reduce the number of cases to be viewed on the July 1, 2021. There are some people whose 10-year mark ends in the month January 2021, but they have to wait six months to apply as opposed to applying a month or two earlier before… Read more »

It makes sense because the provisions of 290 that allowed some registrations to stop registering once they got a COR were eliminated in passage of the tiered registry bill, and so the law simply states that those people have to register — and as we all know, 290 is retroactive. Once 290 no longer said they could stop registering, the law now said they did have to register, whether they had gotten a COR or not. That is, people who were allowed to stop registering were legally required to start registering again. And they can apply under the tiers to… Read more »

I thought the DOJ FAQ on this stated that all the registrants will be notified by mail about their tier assignment? How will the 100,000+ people know that they need to ask their local PD about their tier? Pretty sure vast majority don’t come to this site or really follow the laws and changes pertaining to them registering. Also, it seems too early for DOJ to have a January 1st cut-off to send out that info since people can have their records changed and cleared up to just a few days prior to this date. I foresee a fair amount… Read more »

Their concern over the number petitioning to come off on July 1st, gives me the feeling that while they support the new law and are worried about the increases in registering, they don’t want anyone off it….

Yes, you are absolutely right. If they wanted to be honest, they, would have just eliminated registration for all misdemeanants and also for all felons for whom federal law does not require registration. There should be no application needed for those people to stop, there was no justification to make them wait until now and have to go through a computer evaluation and application process and maybe court arguments. There has never been any justification for imposing registration on a mere misdemeanant, which by law is simply poor demeanor. In fact, back in the 1970s and 1980s, the court were… Read more »

“The board member expressed concern that there may not be adequate resources to review 1,700 petitions within 60 days as required by the Tiered Registry Law.”

Oooh…. that is just too bad. Boo hoo. PC 290 exists entirely in the name of public safety. If that is the law it MUST be followed. Just like any other aspect of it. Strict liability is the name of the game.

Better start looking to divert resources to this task from other places. The law is the law.

@ Joe:. Hah! You’re kidding, right?? Years ago, the CA DOJ was required to correct all the mistakes in the Registry. But did they get it fixed? No, of course not! And who’s going to hold them to it? You think they’re going to arrest & prosecute themselves? What about MI? Their Courts told their legislature to fix the MI Registry. Did they do it?? No, of course not. So, really Joe, there’s no stick and no carrot for the CA DOJ to get things done right or on time.

yup, still no risk level on the megan listings… thought that was suppose to been happening for awhile now


There are some risk assessments on the Megan’s law profile at least for some. I know my profile did not have one prior to my removal, my wife checked on it for me in preparation for attempting to get a COR.

I assumed I did not have an assessment since there was no official evaluation done at the time of my sentencing.

Since I have been removed I have looked up some information, and found some (usually more recent convictions) have scores listed.

Does that mean if the state cannot process the review within 60 days, then does one get off the registry automatically? Or can person sue the state for violating it’s own rules of 60 days for review?

Actually, that is why most people who apply this first year will get the relief, not because the tiered registry law is so great, but because the prosecutors will be too overwhelmed. But in subsequent years, you can expect a lot more people’s applications will be challenged by prosecutors, and under the same standards as a COR, which was rare to be granted to sex offenders.

“The board member expressed concern that there may not be adequate resources to review 1,700 petitions within 60 days as required by the Tiered Registry Law.“ Wow, they just now thought about this? This is a great argument for automatic removal from the registry.

Has there been any discussion about how they will handle COR ? Will there be a procedure put in place to quickly handle those of us with a COR?

At the moment, the COR doesn’t seem to play a roll in the tiered registry. If you getting the COR didn’t already get you off the registry, its not likely to do so next year either. The COR language to get off the registry has been entirely replaced by the Tiered language. It’s still the same code just with all new wording.

@ Jimmy: I completely agree. I think, in time, ACSOL absolutely needs to press the legislature for automatic removals.

You’re right. And that should have been demanded by this group instead of the BS tiered registry bill. And it still should be. And all offenses for which federal law does not require registration should be taken out of 290 — at a minimum.

The big (just want to double check) question I have is, how will the DOJ (board) tier those who have had their offenses reduced to misdemeanors pursuant to 17b and expunged!

I thought I have read and heard on the recorded meetings that ALL misdemeanors are Tier 1. I hope I’m correct.

Do you think this will be true is you’re able to get a 17b reduction after the law goes into effect? Such as you’re a tier 2/3 at the start (initial assignment) and when you get a 17b later your tier changes?

I pray so!

At the moment, I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t work this way. A change is a change. Though the judges might be more reluctant to grant these reductions as they’re still, for whatever reason, up to them rather than compulsory like the 1203.4 dismissal.

I am not lawyer, this is only my opinion.

I agree that the section describing tier 1 states misdemeanor crimes are tier 1. The only exception I can make is if your risk assessment would place you into tier 3.

Again, until the DoJ actually starts assigning individuals into their respective tiers this is still a best guess.

What type of risk assessment automatically places you in T3? Where did you see this info?

The part about risk assessment is 290(d)(3)(D) a person who’s risk level is well above average. Is subject to tier 3. A potential caveat is it says your score at time of release … if they did not do score score someone at that time how would it apply?

The static 99 is such bullshit and the whole above average assessment is crap…

The part ”at time of release” needs to be a topic to discuss with CASOMB. Many never were evaluated and have been living offense free in community for over 10 years. They even state that it wouldn’t be recommended if 10 years or longer on local police and casomb website

There is leeway in the tiered registry law for your tier to be raised upon evaluation. So there is no certain answer to your question.

What about those of us who no longer live in California. That has to be a lot of people.
Law enforcement in my town knows nothing about the Tiered Registry law in California, and I can’t image DOJ trying to figure out how to reach hundreds of local law enforcement departments around the nation, and that’s assuming they even have our updated addresses.
How is this going to work?

Well, there’s a couple issues here. The good news, it seems like unlike the COR, you don’t actually need to live in CA for X period of time to be able to petition off the registry. The bad news, your current state might not care whether or not you’ll be of CA’s registry in regards to you getting off theirs if you currently have to register there as well. Florida and NY would be two such states that I’m aware of. You can just call CA DOJ and ask them about yourself, but others not in the know, are likely… Read more »

The tiered registry law requires you be registering in California, it says nothing about anyone who has moved to another state and is registering there. Under the law, the relief is for those registering in California. Previously for a COR, it was not allowed unless you had the specified number of years of registration IN CALIFORNIA. Those in other states were required to move back and register here until they reached the proper amount of years. That was defended as needed in order to do a proper evaluation of the person.

Uh… Jan 1st 2021 wont that be like….3yrs for them to have “prepared” to handle the petitions? Maybe send in a specialist lmao….sheesh. Ruin people’s lives and then bitch about getting off their fat asses to lift a finger for them…..California

1,700 petitions are in LA county alone. Imagine how many petitions are to be had in other counties. San Bernardino county is expansive and might be similar to LA county. To avoid suing the state for not processing their petition within 60 days, maybe the state should make Tier 1’s automatically relieved from the registry and reserve the reviews for Tier 2’s and Tier 3’s. It doesn’t make sense to review those with misdemeanors or cases that have been dismissed after they’ve waited a decade minimum to get off the registry. Or the courts can waste numerous amounts of resources… Read more »

You seem to misunderstand, it is the local prosecutors who will be handling the petitions, from both the county in which you live and the county where your offense was – either can block you.

@ HopingForHope: Sorry, but what are you talking about?? If you live in another State, you follow that other State’s Registry rules, not California’s. (Why would California bother trying to track down everyone who has been on the California Registry, just to inform them “Hey, if you someday decide to move back to Cali, you’ll be on Tier 2”?) 😣 SMH

Not sure if this is what HopingforHope was getting at, but I myself had always wondered about states who claim they will make you register as long as you are required to register in another state (state of conviction). So it would matter if you were tier I or II in that situation, especially if you were near or over that date of the completion of terms.

People in other states will have to find out about the law on their own. And, under the law, they will have to be registering in California if they want relief. Until they move back and get the relief, federal law requires that they continue to register in any other state.

@David. You make a good point. Let’s think about this. Mine is a good example. Like everyone else, I was given lifetime registration for a 288(a) in California. That was 30 years ago. We moved shortly thereafter to the state I am in now, where my registration requirement would have expired 10 years ago had the offense occured here. The only reason I am still on the registry here is because I am still under California’s lifetime requirement. So, this isn’t just about putting you back on the registry if you move back to Calif. and you don’t qualify for… Read more »

@ HopingForHope: My apologies. Thank you for your explanation. It seems insane to me that one state would defer its requirements to another state’s requirements simply because they are more stringent. If that’s the case, why don’t they also go in the opposite direction and, if your former state would allow you off their registry after 5 years, why shouldn’t your new state allow you off the registry after 5 years? If each state is going to abide by the more stringent requirements of every other state, then the federal government might as well compile all the most stringent requirements… Read more »

No worries. As my case illustrates, you are indeed subject to your state’s registration requirements unless it is “overidden” by another state. So, in my case, I would have been off in 20 years in this state but remain lifetime because of the “long arm of the law” as it relates to those who moved out of Calif. By the same token, if California had a ten year requirement (I know it doesn’t right now but just for the sake of argument let’s say it did) and if my current state had a 20 year requirement, I would fall under… Read more »

@David: You said “… then the federal government might as well compile all the most stringent requirements from all the states, and create one comprehensive set of overriding national registry requirements that every state must follow?” The feds tried to make all states requirements uniform but many states refused for financial reasons. The feds requirements weren’t the most stringent but even denying some federal funds some/most (don’t know the numbers off the top of my head) chose to employ some of their suggestions. Feds have some powers, others are delegated to states. IF registry requirements (and others) were delegated by… Read more »

@HopingForHope: “We moved shortly thereafter to the state I am in now, where my registration requirement would have expired 10 years ago had the offense occured here. The only reason I am still on the registry here is because I am still under California’s lifetime requirement.” —– You’ll have to pursue this administratively. It may take a while and you won’t be able to do it until CA’s law kicks in, but you should be able to succeed. Once the law is in effect and you have an idea what your CA tier is, contact your current State’s SOR office… Read more »

@AJ Yea, I suspect you are correct- there will probably be extra hoops. My state has already told me that they won’t remove me until they are informed by Calif that I am no longer a lifer. That’s probably how it will work for everyone who is out of state. However, as you pointed out, it may not be that simple, which raises the question:, Wouldn’t it raise some possible legal challenges if we are forced to go through a much longer, more difficult maze of requirements versus our peers who are still in California? This is not rocket science:… Read more »

The tiered registry law provides no help for those living out of state. You would have to move back to California and register here first, until you meet the proper number of year.

I need some clarification from some one. What about us registrants in another state such as Florida. You can be off the registry in your convicting state , some how Florida tries to keep everyone on its registry even if you are just visiting here as a registrant. How would we petition. Out of state registrants are not local. Some one please clarify. Will we be placed in a tier.

@ BAM: I believe there is currently litigation pending in Florida regarding lifetime placement on their Registry. As I recall, the plaintiff was convicted in Florida but moved away to a different State many years ago and has since been removed from his new State’s registry…. but remains on Florida’s lifetime registry.

I would think that the California DOJ will only be classifying individuals currently registered in California. There must be thousands that have left California and/or their conviction state. In some cases even if you are removed from registering in your conviction state it may not matter in another state that you reside in. This whole system is fucked up.

My guess you would need to move back to California. I moved back from Nevada when Nevada implemented Adam Walse ACT. I was assessed as a level 1 (lowest) in Nevada and a level three with they implemented AWA.

Not sure about that. I may not be in Calif. but I am definitely on the CA registry and so is everyone else who moved away. I know that because they informed my current state when I first moved here (30 years ago) that I am a lifetime registrant, and that supercedes the registration period in my current state. Not sure they would want thousands of us moving back to Calif. Not sure what that would accomplish.
Anyway, they’ll get to us like everyone else. We’ll just have to wait and see how that process will work.

Not a guess, GRR, that is what the law says.

So, whenever this tiered registry begins that everyone has pushed for so hard and they begin adding additional registering requirements on all those being placed in the tier three-are these same orgs and people going to say or do anything about that. This tier registry is a joke and it puts way more people back on the registry than it will every relieve of their coercion to register. Watch before a year is out, if they do not do it before the law even takes place, they are going start piling on registration requirements and restriction on every level two… Read more »

@mike r Don’t be such a Debbie Downer. This is only a first step to a series of pushes that will eventually get the Registry abolished. We’re not going to lay back after this and let the bills be pushed to further restrict us. Remember the signs that CA Registrants had to put out every Halloween? Gone! Remember the residential restrictions throughout CA? Gone! Everytime new repressive policies get set up, Janice and team knock’em down like bowling pins. Fortunately you have no prophetic powers just a sour attitude. So be glad that the terrible future you foresee is only… Read more »

I have to defend Mike a bit, here. The tiered registry law as it was passed is not in his head. If it were to stand, he and I and many (most?) of those here will be Level 3, despite having never committed a violent act. I am certain that Janice and ACSOL will do everything in their power to reform this law but there are no guarantees that they will be successful at all. I am less convinced that all of the people who do manage to get off of the registry will go on to continue fighting for… Read more »

BS, Bill. What series of pushes, I don’t see any series of pushes – the push for the tiered registry bill is long history now, and we abdicated to a devious, hard core Jackie Lacey. I see no more push. In fact, this group sometime back changed its name to one that would seem to actually support registration, it is called All for Constitutional Sex Offender Laws, not All Against Any Sex Offender Registration Laws. The most opportune political time we will ever have to get it done is now and quickly passing – and there is no push. Are… Read more »

@Unfair Remember Lobby Day? Making calls to Sacramento, sending letters to those legislators while Janice and our supporters lobby for our cause? I sent 140 letters myself to all those politicians to help stoke the fires of change. And what is this “opportune political time we will ever have to get it done is now and quickly passing” that you speak of? We make our opportunities! We’ll march again next year to Sacramento to lobby again! Those who are currently in power like Jackie Lacey is facing re-election this year. Vote her out! BTW, alot of this Registry BS got… Read more »

Yeah, I hope it is only in my head, and stays there. I really am not a pessimistic person but the reality of it is bleak when you look at other states that have done this same crap. Yes, I am grateful for everything that Janice and team have accomplished and have stated it many times and have benefited from their actions. But, I am the only pro se that I know of here in CA that has a pending case in the 9th district fighting this registry. I have not uploaded the AG briefs for the appeal yet but… Read more »

@ Mike R, I hope you continue your pro se fight! You can definitely reveal how the registry has gone beyond its statutory purpose. Also, with more information that people want to kill people with sex crimes, such as the killing of 2 in the prison recently, only boosts your argument of retaliation. In fact, you can use the prison situation as a great parallel. In prison, you are forced to show your papers to other convicts, which is like the registry being broadcast to everyone. With that knowledge known, anyone can take justice into their own hands and that’s… Read more »

Pretty hard to be optimistic about something that is going to make my life worse no matter what. There can be nothing good come out of putting me in a level 3 category along side serial and violent offenders, especially when I am a non-contact, non-violent first time ex-offender from something that happened almost 20 years ago. The entire tier system is completely unfair and really should have been fought as a whole but now it will make it just that much harder for anyone to challenge it. These are realities man, not prophetic but educated guesses based on serious… Read more »

@mike r Just so you know I’m going to put into Tier 3 as well for a Federal CP conviction which is also non-contact and non-violent. Yet despite that I choose to be optimistic and not feel resigned to my fate. Janice and team are gonna lobby every year to change my tier designation. The way I look at it the original Registry would’ve kept us on for life. Pushing for the tier system was the first crack that Janice needed to get our agenda in without the government screaming to stop. Once they see that the sky hasn’t fallen… Read more »

@ Bill: Yes, indeed, Many of us were in Sacramento earlier this month to lobby lawmakers and fight for those very changes!

@miker, I’m sorry you are one of those affected by the corruptions made to the current resurrected tiered registry law. No one, including ACSOL, had a say in what happened behind closed doors during those few days when it was resurrected. It is unjust that tier 1’s and 2’s are being thrown into tier 3. But we will fight hard to get rid of the worst injustices as fast as we can. I personally will fight to get you and others off the registry even though I will remain a tier 3 until they create an off ramp. When tens… Read more »

Thanks for these sensible comments.

Made me wonder though – if a person was so inclined, he/she could write a bill. Write one that is actually intelligent. Then just drop it on the desk of a moral legislator to get it filled.

So ACSOL could write bills. Could publish them on this website. Could share them with media. Then millions of people could see how dumb their existing Registry laws are.

Other special interests write bills.

@Will, trust me, this is not a new idea. But the reality is that throughout history politicians will rarely stick their necks out on the chopping block to stand up for what they know in their hearts is right when their brainwashed constituency has believed the opposite for 70+ years of the registry. It is hard enough for us to find authors for the tweaks we lobbied for in the tiered registry, much less someone who would risk trying to abolish it when the public wants to EXPAND registrant restrictions. That politician would be shunned and recalled, like Judge Persky… Read more »

One can just hate society and go on. Many if not most of us do just that. Some may find resources such as this site or others, many more do not. Some live their lives just doing as they are told. Some may even fight. I’d say most have no idea of their rights or even that the laws are unconstitutional or are being fought by some of us. I have been proactive once I knew I could. I would not even be here if I knew I could keep my fucking mouth shut. My confession convicted me. My “victim”… Read more »

Do you realize that before the tiered registry passed, we were ALL under the constraints of tier3???

James ~ I see what you mean about all being Tier 3 (Lifetime) before this law passed, but that is not entirely true. As far as length of the registry requirement, yes, we were like Tier 3, Lifetime. BUT, what people mean is that some were lifetime but NOT on the pubic site, and that will change with the new law. We are not talking about the length but about the added punishment, being published now whereas before they were not.

Sorry, I just did a double take.

Are you saying that those who 1) have been convicted of a misdemeanor SO in California and 2) have NEVER (as part of a plea agreement) been on the Megan’s Law site should now EXPECT to be placed on the Megan’s Law site in 2021?


Depends on the misdemeanor. If it’s one that isn’t in the set of offenses that will be published, then it’s safe to say it’ll remain that way. If it is part of the listed offenses for public disclosure, but you met the exclusion criteria, you may no longer be able to avoid the website as they changed the criteria for exclusion.

I have a misdemeanor 647.6 from 1997. Have never been on the Megan’s Law website due to being granted an exclusion, as one of the offenses that qualifies. I’ve lived a completely crime free life since this single incident in my life, lived a productive life, never had my registration be a factor. For my reward, because of the new tiered registry, I’ll be listed and everything in my life will likely change. For those who are already listed, they know how difficult life is when you’re “discovered” to be a registrant. Those of us who’ve been able to fly… Read more »

Not all violations under the new law will be on a public site. It will, essentially, track existing law as far as non-posts.

You are probably someone that is going to benefit from the law, so yeah I would be optimistic then, I can admit that.
Anyways, I hope you are right regardless.

What is up with all these people every time they say something someone does not like they come back with personal attacks or subtle jabs like, “just a sour attitude.” Sorry buddy, but really you’re not a psychic that can read minds by reading one comment in a blog. I happen to have a great attitude, and it will stay great as long as the state is not harassing me to the point that something really bad happens. I will not take restrictions and more onerous reporting requirements and all that BS while all these other people get all this… Read more »

@mike r I appreciate the fight you have waged and continue to follow it with great respect for the time and effort you have put into it. Your own comments often beg the response you seem to be wondering about in this post. I agree with the earlier post from DIK, I can see where you are coming from about your concerns for how the tiered system will work out. I also think that starting to have large numbers of people being removed from the registry will demonstrate to everyone how worthless the registry idea is. But this is an… Read more »

@mike r Well I’m glad you clarified to everyone that you have a great attitude! And you’re absolutely correct that I have no prophetic powers, otherwise I would’ve foreseen my situation and never be on the Registry in the first place…;-) But all jokes aside, your comment about how you felt about the Tiered Registry did end with 🙁 …which was a Debbie Downer moment. Attitude is separate from conditions, although not mutually exclusive, we can still choose to feel about anything that comes our way. Here in this particular case we have you and me see the same thing… Read more »

I have a question that may or may have not been addressed yet, but I am hoping somebody can shed some light. I find it ridiculous that one needs to petition to get off the registry once the time has elapsed. That gives the court/ judge too much power to deny the petition based on whatever reason. So, here is my question. How to other states with tiered registries handle these situations? Do people in other States have to petition for removal, or is it automatic there? If automatic, CA needs to adopt the same system, in my opinion.

In the state I’m in, you don’t need to petition. I understand many, if not most, states are like that. They have an expiration date on your registration, and once they determine you’re clean you are relieved of the duty to register. I’m sure the reason they went with petitioning in CA is politics. I doubt that after 70 years they would just up and de-register people en masse automatically. Nor do I don’t think that would happen in any of the other states that have lifetime registration.

Hoping ~ Thanks for the reply. My understanding is that only 4 States have Lifetime, so just because CA is one of them shouldn’t mean that they can’t follow the regulations of the States that have a Tiered Registry, as we will be one of those States next year. There are too many registered persons in CA, so making the removal automatic is the only logical thing to do here. We need to keep educating people on how and why registries are useless. Keep bringing up the current cases fo parents, coaches, teachers, priests, and other trusted people who are… Read more »

Not in NJ or Ga

Believe it or not, before the updated version of PC 290, you were able to deregister automatically once you earned 1203.4. I think the updated version of 290 was passed in 2007. So between 1958 – 2007, 1203.4 got you off the registry b/c in-person registration was deemed quasi-criminal as well a limited one’s right to travel. That 1958 case was Kelly v Municipal.

I wish this whole registry will just go away. I wish CA registrants will sue California, just like what happened in Michigan. The tiered registry isn’t in effect yet and already, CASOMB already aren’t playing by the rules. They were supposed to mail your tier designation, but are now making you get it from law enforcement. This is crap. Same with every other crazy thing about this “new” and “improved” law. From all the vagueness in the bill’s language, the Static 99/R crap, to how this bill can HURT as much as it can help. This bill is just smothered… Read more »

Well, even though the ACLU won victories in Michigan, Michigan has simply ignored all the Court rulings! Yes, I certainly agree that a lawsuit ought to be filed against all the blatant Constitutional violations and logical fallacies in the new tiered registry law, even if the state ends up ignoring all the Court rulings (as you already pointed out, the state is not following the law by refusing to mail out tier designations). Equally troubling, and as my username suggest, I strongly believe that the inclusion of the Static-99R is one the most underrated flaws in the registry; it will… Read more »

I think Ca registry scheme is getting off easy. Rather than deem, “if one part of the scheme is unconstitutional, then the whole is also unconstitutional.”

For example, residency restriction was considered unconstitutional. Rather than redo the whole registry and let everyone off before then, Ca just amends it. That’s how CA registry isn’t going away b/c it isn’t treated as a whole contract.

I truly want to know why in-person police reporting isn’t a disability. I think Penn stated it’s a disability. Michigan’s Snyder stated it’s a disability. Why isn’t Ca addressing this?

the scam 99 is sickening

@Roger H- Very well stated. In fact, I believe that if we push TOO hard, it could actually backfire.
I say leave it in the capable hands of Janice, Chance and others who know how the system works.

I agree with your statements but there is something else left out of your masterful writing. You’re missing the whole fact that we have to sway public opinion, which means we have to be more open as registered citizens, discuss the injustices, failures, true facts, etc to the public so they know and understand our fight.

I’m glad you mentioned that, @TP! At our conference we will have two breakout sessions that will teach how to do that! Sign up today, everyone! Get filled with hope! Make long-lasting change!

Already doing it.

My PO will not authorize the travel. There needs to be other ways for ACSOL to get this info out to the registrant community than the meetings and conferences.

So my research tells me that: 1.January 1st 2021, they begin deciding what tiers to put us in. 2.July 1st 2021, we can begin to file our petitions with the court in the county we reside in, also notify our registering agency so they can be aware of our petition. 3.Wait 3 weeks to see a Judge and request relief. 4.Wait a agonizing 30-90 day wait period for a decision. 5. January 1st 2022, for the unfortunate group of RCs: be put back on Megans Law, even if you had relief from being on the net, before the law was… Read more »

Recommend anyone seeking relief get an independent psychosexual evaluation by a reputable evaluator who’ll do a whole gambit of tests to truly prove you’re not a threat. Use it.

Dont rely on the state to do it right. I have twice, years apart, with the same “not now, never will be, and never been a threat” conclusion.

that’s crazy that you can be off of the megan’s law site and after this improved law be on it. is that not what happened to frank many years ago? is something going to be done to keep history from repeating?? seems absurd that you can be unpublished for X number of years, then suddenly you deserve to be published even when you’ve kept a clean history. what would suddenly warrant being posted on the megan’s law website after this improved tier law?????

@ed, it’s not about logic or justice, it’s about a certain female So. Cal. politician who hates us and who killed the tiered registry we supported, then was forced by Gov. Brown to bring it back, all behind closed doors and without outside input. BUT in revenge, she and the police insisted that thousands of tier 1 and 2 registrants be pushed up to tier 3.

That’s why ACSOL is fighting to push those registrants down to the lower tiers where they should have been.

this is so ridiculous. if someone is off and unpublished, and has never been on the hit list megan’s law website, and has been so without reoffense, then they shouldn’t just be posted after a new law takes place. the state shouldn’t be able to impose new penalties after the fact. this should really be common sense. this entire improved law is disturbing and troubling on so many levels

From what I understand, posting on ML website will remain mostly the same. The difference is that now “certain criteria” has been removed to allow many to remain off the site. No more exclusion after an expungement that knocked a felony to a misdemeanor. That’s was ACSOL is fighting for now I believe. To keep those that were off after meeting criteria to remain off. Initial misdemeanors that kept some off will remain in tact for exclusion from site. That’s essentially what SB 384 states. If your offense is not listed under those that are publicly posted, it will remain… Read more »

Nick, that’s incorrect. Whatever court decisions that kept you off will remain intact. What’s changing is specifically 647.6 misdemeanors. Currently, if you have this, you could send in an exclusion app and they’d get you off. You don’t even need to provide any court paperwork. But under the new tier system, 647.6 misdemeanor will be public despite remaining a tier 1 crime. And anyone who was previously granted the exclusion for this will be posted publicly.


Thanks for the correction. All of this is difficult to keep track of. I didn’t know it was generally referring to a specific crime that would no longer be eligible for exclusion.

I would like to know the number also, “January 1st 2022, for the unfortunate group of RCs: be put back on Megan’s Law, even if you had relief from being on the net, before the law was changed.” How is this fair? How is this a step in the right direction? How is letting some beg for relief from big nanny gov a step forward when anyone can petition the court as a fundamental right to start with without the tier bs and the BS made up criteria? How is legitimizing a registry by congratulating the enemy for throwing a… Read more »

==== “January 1st 2022, for the unfortunate group of RCs: be put back on Megan’s Law, even if you had relief from being on the net, before the law was changed.” ==== Interesting. I wonder if a registrant who fits under this premise can then sue the state by revealing this action is punishment as well as carries no scientific proof to undo current law. Ca. Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 9: “SEC. 9. A bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts may not be passed.” You are abiding by a contract that removed… Read more »

This will be a toll hurdle to cross. Just about anything related to registering has been explicitly ruled to be non-punitive. Suing this being punishment is just about like suing that they reduced the speed limit on a road you drive.

And when it comes to laws in general, scientific facts have almost zero relevance. The system basically trusts that the law makers have the best interest at heart for the general public good, and they are in absolutely no way obligated to present any evidence to support it.

And also Bill, “Yet despite that I choose to be optimistic and not feel resigned to my fate. Janice and team are gonna lobby every year to change my tier designation.” I see your enthusiasm and optimism is attached to some type of tangible guarantee that someone will be fighting for your circumstance, no one has stated anything about fighting for those convicted of PC 288.2 which is also a non-contact, non-violent offense. I have fought crazy hard and with only the help of the few posters here on the site with no help from these attorneys or professionals and… Read more »

Exactly being re designated without due process is wrong. 2’s to 3’s 1’s to 2’s. We already have a tier system here. Level 1, serious offenders, SVP’s. You can’t up someone’s dangerousness without a hearing according to the 6th circuit. I wish Janice and team would acknowledge this.

Dont forget, the title is very misleading. Most get the label due to the age of the minor, NOT because of multiple victims or crimes! When I think of SVP, I think of a repeat offender but that’s not the case.

@Mike r. As arduous as the registry is for you and everyone else, imagine suffering it while innocent, 100% innocent, as in wrongfully convicted as was Brian Banks, who will speak at the conference. In relation to your comment, what are you doing for the innocent? Do you help with the innocence projects even slightly? Do you help spread the word about wrongful convictions? Do you practice what you preach? I understand you have an appeal going, but until that is final we cannot rely on it helping. Indeed, it could turn out that bad facts make bad law. I… Read more »

To be fair, Banks and Mike R is a comparison of wrongful conviction vs wrongful post-conviction penalty. Both need addressing. Mike R is doing his part as he is currently in a case against the state, without legal office help assistance. While Banks does help prevent wrongful conviction, his case doesn’t affect the registry. Everyone who finishes their custody on the registry should be free of any entanglements. And that’s where Mike R comes into play as he’s trying to help free citizens be free due to the registry scheme. We need all the help we can get to bring… Read more »

I’m not sure if we disagree or not, but consider arrogance being the common denominator of “wrongful conviction vs wrongful post-conviction.” For comparison sake, Justice Scalia on the death penalty and the registry. In sum, I think the various and widespread innocence projects are humbling the criminal justice system however slightly and that may be almost the only dent in its amour. Plus innocence projects are a noble and unselfish causes that few can disagree with since no one should be wrongfully convicted even if the crime is the murder of the 11-year-old girl, or especially if wrongfully… Read more »

Not trying be pessimistic but have used an open mind and have came to the conclusion that the tier registry is a scam that hurts more than it helps the majority of individuals. Just facts. I respect you opinion and can only wish and attempt to educate others that the bill as written and supported is in fact a giant leap backwards and is not in any way overall beneficial to anyone except the state and those attorneys that will be making millions petitioning for people to get off the registry whom may or may not be dangerous as no… Read more »

@mike r First let me state I respect the effort you have, are and will continue to put into your fight against being forced to register. Second, let’s discuss matters of opinion. Most of your statements of fact are not facts but opinion. To state that the new unimplemented hurts more then it helps is pure speculation. What will happen to the number of people who were not on the public Megan’s law web page and will now be made public is horrible. Everyone in the fight to help people forced to register agrees that this is a problem that… Read more »

Mike R, I used to provide my opinions on this site, but I rarely do now because of the attacks you had on my opinions. Many people will benefit from this new system. I imagine repeat (not all) offenders and those with a high static 99 won’t? Should everyone be affected by others poor choices? As noted, there might/should be updates to the law prior to 2021. My main questions include: 1. How will PC 17B affect my tier status? (I’m battery was reduced and later expunged (PC 17B and PC 1203.4) 2. Will a high static 99 (I’m a… Read more »

I think it’s still up in the air (nobody knows for sure) as to exactly how Static 99 will be incorporated, and how far back they’ll use it. (Says on their site it’s not valid for older convictions, 10+ years offense free in community with no prior score upon release.) As far as site goes, it sounds like if your original offense is not listed under those that require public listing, it’ll remain that way. However, if you were granted exclusion after the fact, you’ll no longer be excluded. Most of it is assumption, depending on how they will fully… Read more »

@ USA, I think you’re utilizing the wrong term here. Criticism and attack possess two different meanings. With criticism, you can get some conversation that may include new information that wasn’t in one’s purview before. As for your questions, #1 and #2 can be found on the pdf provided about the new tiered implementation as well as bill itself. Find those links and make them your favorites so you can be reassured your answer is there. As for #3, I believe that is also online, and probably in the bill. That situation could be more fluid than #1 and #2.… Read more »

New Person ~ Can you provide a link to the PDF you are referring to? I did a search for the term PC17b in the bill, and nothing turned up. You mentioned that a 17b reduction and/ or 1203 expungement is listed in the PDF and the bill, but I did not see it. Thank you!

I have not seen anything regarding 1203.4. That’s still a huge question mark that I honestly would be surprised to have any real impact. What I think people might be trying to read into is the Tier Bill using the word “conviction”. 1203.4 sets your conviction aside. It’s a semantics thing that may or may not work in our favor.

The 17b isn’t mentioned specifically, but from all the various conferences and such, it seems like ALL misdemeanors will be Tier 1. So it’s sort of reading between the lines.

Tiered bill link: From the bill text: “(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.” A 17b is a felony reduction to a misdemeanor. The tiers a broken down, mostly, by the offense. The only mention… Read more »

@new person

How are you concluding that if you have an expungement, then you won’t be listed on the Megan’s Law website under the tiered registry? From what I gather, which I took from the same FAQ as you did, the only way you’ll be excluded is if you can “clearly demonstrates that the registrant was the victim’s parent, stepparent, sibling, or grandparent”. I’d love it if you were correct here, but I’m not seeing it.

Page 5 of the PDF will answer most questions about Megan’s Law list of updated exclusions. If you did earn a 1203.4, then you are excluded from the listing. From the FAQ pdf: ” An offense for which the registrant successfully completed probation, provided that the registrant submits to the department a certified copy of a probation report, presentencing report, report prepared pursuant to Section 288.1, etc… ” @ person who wants to know about expungement If you successfully complete probation, then you automatically earn 1203.4 expungement. I cited the first factor that excludes you from Megan’s List. From FAQ… Read more »

@New Person ~ I’m reading it differently than you. The way I am interpreting it is that you must have completed probation successfully and show some sort of proof (in one of the forms mentioned) that you’re related to the victim as described in that paragraph. Otherwise, it would not include that relationship part in the same sentence. I hope I’m wrong and you’re correct, as I have an expungement and have never been listed up until now. I’m skeptical, however, as when the tiered registry was getting passed, everyone said it eliminated all of the exclusions except for the… Read more »

I guess I’ll identify you as “@new person”. Your query: “I’m reading it differently than you. The way I am interpreting it is that you must have completed probation successfully and show some sort of proof (in one of the forms mentioned) that you’re related to the victim as described in that paragraph. ” Your interpretation is, “A and B”. The way it is written is, “A or B”. There is a significant difference. I think all the commas are confusing you. I’ll use parenthesis to help clarify the way it is read. 1. An offense for which the registrant… Read more »

USA, I rarely post on here anymore, Im in the exact same situation as you
(94 index offense, 17b, 1204.3) and have been wondering those same questions. Thank u for your post.

I forgot to state both Mike R & New. You both seem to have control issues and from what I’ve read, I think it’s best to focus on your own business.

Here we go again USA, I have not stated one word against you in this post or for a long time, but yet you throw me in this mix. I was actually proud of your recent remarks until you start taking jabs again. Try keeping your personal beliefs of other’s characters to yourself, they help no one and only divide. I did not even mention that it was you who stated that the registry was the only thing that keeps YOU from re-offending, but there it is. That is where it all started because you revealed a lot about your… Read more »

Bottom line tiered registry is BS. If it was fair I would be all for it, and I am sure if it benefited me I would have a different take. But it fails both those test.
And lets stick with the intelligent dialog and stop taking jabs at others on the site.

1.700 petition in LA county alone. Damn imagine the whole state of California. It’s cool to read everybody’s speculation on what’s going to happen in 2021 but at the end of the day it’s all just speculation but one thing we know for sure is that they can’t hold us all forever. Those that qualify for relief from the registry after their 10 year 20-year mark their name goes into a database if you qualify you will probably be notified that you are eligible to petition to be removed and after 60 days of your petition with no response from… Read more »

@aero1 I agree with the first about of your comments. It is just speculation and I suspect/believe the appeal process will be more direct then many fear. I celebrate for those people who will get relief under the new tiered registry, but will redouble my support to end the registry altogether. After that though, you lost me. If my time on the registry taught me anything it is that the registry is a waste. It is continual punishment to force people to register. Additionally, you neglect to recognize that a large number of people who committed non contact and non… Read more »

While Tier 3 will certainly include people who have done incredibly horrible things, it’ll currently also include people who had possession of images (CP) as well as people like me who took an upskirt picture (311.4a). I think people have a right to be angry when Tier 3 has such a huge spectrum of crime. And don’t forget: the above people that are now part of Tier 3 were forced into it by one or two legislatures out of spite. How people are not supposed to be angry about that is beyond me.

@Aero1: Your comments right here make me think that there should not be a tiered Registry. I think ALL of you should remain on a Registry for life. How does that sound? Just so you’ll know where I am coming from, I don’t live in CA so none of this affects me directly. So I hope I’m fairly unbiased because of that. I’ve been Registered for well over 2 decades for a minor offense, one for which the prosecutor offered a plea deal with 0 days in jail. I had already bonded out of jail so he was not able… Read more »

@ Will Allen you post on everything why don’t you just run for president you think you do all the good

He’s too busy writing pointless, endless diatribes to run for office.

Good job telling two lies in one sentence! Is that one sentence? I suppose.

@C: So sorry your feelings keep getting hurt. Is it more “pointless” to say “I shouldn’t be Registered but a bunch of other people should” or “you are wrong, no one should be Registered”? I think you are a bit confused about “pointless” and I think that has more to do with your feelings than actual reality. Your comment was pointless though. And if a writing is too long for your attention span, just skip it. Easy.

While I can see your opinion being sound, it’s still flawed considering one is automatically a tier 3 depending on the age of the minor and it doesn’t really show how one person will conduct themself post confinement. Theres plenty of tier 1 and 2 offenders that have gone back to prison, while I’m currently listed as tier 3, have been out over 13 years crime free, have obtained a bachelor’s degree, have worked the whole time I’ve been out, married, and have multiple children of my own who live with me. Should a person such as myself be considered… Read more »

@Aero1, I believe you are off the mark on the frustrations here. The point of frustration is there should be no registry. How people go about that frustration differs. If you are released from custody, then you should be a free citizen through-and-through. There are fail safes to where a registry isn’t needed. If a person is a repeat offender, then the courts will deal with that repeat offender. It is within the court system that a repeat offender will be kept away from society longer or even longer. What you are missing is that the registry induces an invisible… Read more »

@ aero1
If I moved into your neighborhood….. (crime free 26 years, tier 3) your property value would reduce 4% (assuming you own your home). The neighborhood within .1 mile would reduce accordingly. That is a genuine fear. Stranger danger is not a rational fear. It is a made-up fear. It’s hard to comprehend someone living this life on the registry succumbing to it’s irrationality.

I have lived in my neighborhood for 17 years and have seen the prices of houses in my neighborhood and MY house DOUBLE in price ; I am in the Megan website and do my regular registration etc. so that is not a true statement at least in So Calif

You must understand that even if housing prices have doubled everywhere, that says nothing about whether or not the 4% statement is true or not, right? The 4% is relative.

Also, just as an interesting aside, but I heard a funny thing about anecdotes not all that long ago. The saying is “the plural of anecdote is not ‘data'”. I found that to be quite funny and accurate. Many people don’t understand that.

@ JM from wi: Where’d you get that stat of “If I moved into your neighborhood….. (crime free 26 years, tier 3) your property value would reduce 4% (assuming you own your home). The neighborhood within .1 mile would reduce accordingly.” from?

Good question. I saw a study over 10 years ago that stated a reduction, although I don’t remember the amount. It was higher than 4%, but I seem to recall less than 15%. I’m sure there is a reduction. I’ve seen a lot of people dealing in real estate talking about it – both buyers and sellers. I’ve used it myself. I very recently attempted to buy some property right across the street from me and used my own Registry listing to get the price reduced. They didn’t know who was buying, of course. It is not the first time… Read more »

See above or google sex offender real estate values

I’m selling commercial industrial land in my “neighborhood” which should be conceptually exempt from this issue. But if it were to impact my sale 4 percent it would reduce my sale over $200,000.00 now that’s a rational fear. Not an unknown registrant.

@ JM from wi: The link provides no statistics.

The second link you provided ( ) references a link of's_Residence_on_Single-Family_House_Selling_Price

ANY link with .com, .net, etc can be posted by anyone. Provide a credible, reliable source please.

@Will: I’m glad you could take advantage of the falsehood related to real estate. What study?

@R M: Yeah, that study is from waaaaay back. I’d like to see it again myself but I don’t think I’d take much time to try to find out if I archived it at some point. Maybe I did, maybe/probably I didn’t. Maybe I’ll just do a web search sometime if I feel up for it. Or I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the scholars in this field already know. I don’t know exactly who might care about that or specialize in it, but I don’t think Janice does. Perhaps Eric Janus? Emily Horowitz? Or, you could! I personally… Read more »

@Will: Believing that PFR reduces real estate vales is a belief. I want proof. Real estate agents are protecting their ass. As I said before, I’m glad you advantage it. I have my money in CD’s, stocks grew but are not going down, real estate is dependent on many factors.

Correction to what I said “…stocks grew but are not going down.” That was NOW, not not.


“… and let’s be honest most of the people who are labeled a tier3 or high-risk have done some of the most horrendous things you can imagine…”

A huge travesty of justice is being made by the new tiered system in that all 311’s (poss of CP) is a tier 3. This is a hands-off “computer” crime. Simple possession, not production nor distribution, will fall into tier 3. I suspect this will account for a large and disproportionate population of that tier.

It will account for a lot of suicides too once they’re publicly listed.

@Factss should matter: Sadly, not many will care.

All 311 violations including misdemeanor 311s will be tier 3 ?

Lol right that is true 😆 we solved it in just sick of everytime I get on here he always says well I do this and I do that you know what I mean

@666: Have you commented any solutions to any of this registry Madness?

@RM with regards to statistics on real estate values- I have not researched at all. My point was in response to AERO1
“Especially as parent or Grand parent I would like to be notified whenever violent or habitual offenders move into my neighborhood…”
My opinion is that the registry is now politically and $ driven using fear as a tool to pump the idiot masses. Hearing individuals on this site speak to the benefits of the registry is strange given the information available to us; as well as the experience of being on it.

@jm from wi: “My opinion is that the registry is now politically and $ driven using fear as a tool to pump the idiot masses.” Yes, I agree. I do not, however, agree that property values are decreased by someone living in the area. Mine have increased tremendously. Maybe as Will stated not as much, but an increase is an increase.

Yeah, increases or decreases don’t really matter. Say you and your neighbors each paid 100k for your homes and they are now worth 500k. If your neighbor is trying to sell their home, there are definitely people walking away from it because a PFR lives nearby. They should be able to sell it for 500k but they will likely end up having to sell it for less, perhaps 450k.

Personally, I think people who support Registries deserve that hit and I’m glad it happens.

The Tiered Registry has no purpose whatsoever, and I think we only agreed to it because it will give some relief from an otherwise lifetime registry. In my opinion, if there was such a heinous crime that deserves lifetime, maybe that crime should have been punished by life in prison. If someone served time and gets released, they should not be considered a threat any longer, otherwise they would have not been released to society. In any case, if this new law wants certain offenses to be put into Tier 3, do it from now on but not retroactive. This… Read more »

Why do you guys even argue with a select few? They are Tier 3’s! What’s that tell you? Look at the source? Who cares what they think or anyone else. This blog allows people to vent and express their views. We have a few select individuals who live on this site and try to portray themselves as all mighty. Tier 3? How did they get there? It’s almost comical. I log on once a day? Week? Look at the source. Who cares what they think! It doesn’t matter.

“They are Tier 3’s! What’s that tell you? Look at the source? Who cares what they think or anyone else.” Wow….really? Is this not how the general public thinks of all of us? Is this not how murderers, drug dealers, and others in prison think of people on the registry? Being on the registry is like being a convicted felon, ALL of us are still discriminated against due to our felony regardless of the crime. Do you honestly think the average citizen thinks someone who downloaded child porn or had ANYTHING to do with children (even if it was a… Read more »


I concur with Gralphr. Also to let you know that Federal CP cases that are usually designated Tiers 1 and 2 are going to be put in Tier 3 by next year thanks to a particular spiteful female politician.

Don’t be so certain that only the “worst cases” go to Tier 3.

“Why do you guys even argue with a select few? They are Tier 3’s! What’s that tell you?” Yeah we are looking at the source, it is someone who thinks just like the general public with the tiered registry and projects his belief that the registry is the only thing keeping him from re-offending so it must work. He makes my point exactly. This MFKER that skates on a on-hands violent offense wants to claim others that never had any contact with anyone else deserve to be in tier 3, or that he is somehow better than those that are… Read more »

“As long as we stay fractured and point the finger such as “I’m not as bad as them, I’m in a lower tier, please like me” There is only one individual on here that seems to want to fracture everyone and makes outrageous unfounded claims about others like he did here. He must work for the state or one of these crazy ass politicians or something the way he states things or acts. Or he is just what he appears to be, a whacked out self-proclaimed predator (and I never attached a designation like that to anyone, he stated it… Read more »

Everyone else had perfectly civil and intelligent dialog in this post even though they disagreed. But guess what, not USA. He had to jump in with his normal character attacks as usual and now he will have to go lick his wounds after he gets everything he has coming to him from respectful individuals on here before he comes back and spouts off at the mouth again. Try coming back with some facts like I did about your statements and not just some pulled out of the air BS about some made up offenses others never committed and how much… Read more »

I will just concur, look at the source and what was stated about tier 3s, “Why do you guys even argue with a select few? They are Tier 3’s! What’s that tell you?.” This exactly proves my point about the new tiered system. Someone claimed it was pure speculation, well is what he stated pure speculation, because that is the reality of it people. Scary dangerous like I stated as well since people who claim the registry is the only keeping them from re-offending with violent felonies may get relief while those that never touched or had physical contact with… Read more »

@mike r I agree with you that the ending of the Registry will ultimately be better than the Tier Registry. No doubt about it… But think about what it takes to get there. Obviously you need legislators to make it happen. And what do legislators need? Public support from his/her voters, the media, and even law enforcement. No politician is going to stick his/her neck out on a unpopular policy that would get them elected out of office. No matter how you slice it you can’t get around that reality. Obviously public support is crucial to fundamentally change those policies.… Read more »

I do want to touch on your point, “Obviously you need legislators to make it happen.” This is obviously not fact as we have seen the legislature in Michigan has done nothing and will only do something after a court orders them to. It was brave attorneys just like it was in the civil rights movement with Thurgood Marshal that changed the system, not legislators or public opinion. And, “Public awareness of what is wrong with our Registry is really really really really low. In fact most people think it’s a good thing.” There is no way that you are… Read more »

@mike r Your counter argument, “This is obviously not fact as we have seen the legislature in Michigan has done nothing and will only do something after a court orders them to,” still indicates that no law will change without law makers. Can’t get around that. The other counter argument, “There is no way that you are going to convince the general public that registries should go,” may sound compelling but I don’t buy it because it hasn’t really been tried. There’s yet to be a serious campaign to expose the Registry for what it is and how many people… Read more »

Also, you kind of made my point about public opinion and this new tier system. Like I stated below it was all bad when you googled CA sex offender registry in the past, now it is all praise of this new sham system. Good luck convincing the general public that it is a sham and is all bad BS now. I say it was virtually impossible before, but now it is impossible for sure. Just facts and reality. But hey, as long as it spares at least someone somewhere then it’s all great right. Where have I heard that saying,… Read more »

Nice arguments Bill, kind of hard to argue against that logic. Especially this, “There’s yet to be a serious campaign to expose the Registry for what it is and how many people can technically be sucked into it on even BS charges.” I really hope you come up with something, I tried in court for 3 years and am waiting my results, but a campaign as you speak of would be extraordinary. I am just so pissed off that they are putting me in a tier 3 for attempted lewd act when actual lewd acts are getting tier two. Simply… Read more »

I suppose we are all fighting the same fight from different angles Mike. And I think it’s a good thing.

As for that clown he’s not worthy of your responses. Sometimes it’s better to leave a troll alone…

Hey friends, I know it’s tough out there in Cali. I feel your frustrations. I’m one of those folks that would likely be a tier 3 because of my felony cp offense. I caught my conviction in Wisconsin, an thought about moving home back home to California after being away for decades but there’s really nothing there for many anymore. But If I had caught cp case in Cali, I wouldn’t have done a 3 year mandatory minimun prison sentence like I did in this cesspool of Wisconsin. In fact, being a first time offender and not being involved in… Read more »

Used to be all bad crap when you Googled CA sex offender registry. Try it now, everything is praising this new BS bill that is a complete lie. It is not risk based in any form as they all claim, it is BS offense based regardless of any other factors except their BS static 99 crap that only increases the likely hood that those that pose zero risk will be treated as those that are fresh out of prison or habitual offenders.

@Mike R….I’m with Bill on this one bud. We all know WHO and WHAT he is…..responding to that TROLL is essentially like bullying somebody with a mental disability and it’s beneath you! You’re better than that! People value your contributions and insight on this forum. People respect you here bro and that can’t be said for the guy who is the common denominator for most of the squabbles on this forum.

Thanks guys, I know exactly what you all are saying and I get it. I will leave the poor soul alone and ignore him. Hard to be humble sometimes you know….Lol….

Are you okay, I’ve just read 4 book long responses to my opinion? I truly suggest some of you try joining a support group or getting counseling. Some of the things I’ve read are over the top. I think it’s great to provide an opinion, but some of you take it to an unhealthy level. Peace out. See u next week. I’m busy

Yep, next week when you come back with some lame ass character jabs when someone has different opinions than you because you have no facts and you believe just as the enemy does for some reason, but will not come out and say it. Oh wait, I think you did state it perfectly with the tier 3 remarks and your support of the registries. And just for reference on civil discourse USA, look at Bill and My discussion. No personal attacks and civil discourse even though we disagree. That is not what you do, you attack personal character when you… Read more »

Hilarious. Someone posts a view and a few select few respond 4 times with multiple paragraphs? I love writing comments. I think it’s hilarious how a few select few enjoy correcting others? Attacking others? Yet, if they where so bright, why are they tier 3? How many arrests? Impulse control? Responding 2? 3? 4 times to one simple, honest and accurate comment isn’t normal. It’s poor impulse control. There should be 30-40 different responders per blog/topic, but it remains the same. We have 3-4 Tier 3 know it alls who attack, justify and coerce others to believe in what they… Read more »

@ USA, This is a wonderful blog because it espouses many different ideas under the registrant umbrella, including your own. Due to your lack of technological sense and reading comprehension, you had three queries. All your queries had solutions, some obvious and some inherent, within the text bill 384. I provided the link and you still couldn’t comprehend. I then answered them with specifically based upon the text bill. Rather than being grateful for answering your questions, you would rather incite arguments. If that is what one does to mask their illiteracy in technology and reading, then it’s pretty shameful.… Read more »

Whatever, everyone knows you… Supporter of the registries and claims it is the only thing keeping him from re-offending. Your words not mine…. Not smart enough to know civil discourse from character attacks.

mike r If you live in the Los Angeles area have you checked to see if you can get a Cert of Rehab? Call the Public Defenders Office and check with the Dept of Rehab I was able to get one for my 664/288(a) if was a sting …. not sure how it compares to yours

Yeah, Mot I did prison time because I fought it to the end. I am almost positive from everything I have researched that I am burnt because I went to the pen. Unfortunately that charge is not what is getting me, it is the 288.2 that they added on after I would not take their plea deal that is putting me in tier 3.

Thanks though, I will look into a little more but I know I looked at it and if you do prison you cannot get the CoR or reductions or anything.

mike r I did 22 months in prison so that is NOT a roadblock…call the Public Defender and ask for Miraim

If you went to prison, you are an automatic Tier. 3! I doubt you can expunge your offense and you can’t reduce it to a misdemeanor! Screwed!

TMZ ~ What makes you think that all people who went to prison are an automatic Tier 3? I don’t believe that this can be true.

Apparently TMZ, MOT did it and we have no reason not to believe him. After all, he is not USA… LMAO…. Anyways MOT I will check it out for what it is worth. The real problem here is the 288.2 that they threw onto my charges after I decided to fight the 664/228(a) that is putting me and in tier 3. It appears that if you used the internet an anyway you are tier 3. So people with actual hands on offenses-USA- are getting relief while those that never met or had any physical contact with anyone are getting put… Read more »

It’s very obvious how some posters are opportunist. They prey on those who are weak? Or, they typically minimize their behavior, often portraying themselves as the victim? It’s everyone else’s fault but their own. Your last comment Mike R, confirms what most of us already know. You clearly have all of the characteristics. I honestly feel sorry for you.

My bad, I was going lay off USA. After all, it is no contest and isn’t fair of me to challenge or criticize a feeble mind.

I see USA is back to his/her/she/he/it usual ways of judging everyone else. I’m going back to my qaurentini.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x