ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

California

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.

Join the discussion

  1. mo

    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.

    • American Detained in America

      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.

      • New Person

        “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 their January 10-year mark date.

        It feels wrong to say a law starts on this date, but no one can benefit from it for six months. Sounds like a great incompetence on this law passage.

        • Unfair

          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 be relieved of the registration requirement once again – and hope future changes don’t again take away their relief and require that they resume registration again.

          This is clear because that point was settled by the California Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit in Doe v. Harris a few years back.

          That was not the first time that happened. It previously happened to all those who had been relieved of registration after getting 1203.4 relief after completing probation. That used to be the standard for relief for all those who got probation, they did not need a COR because their conviction had been expunged. But the law was changed, first in the 1980s to no longer allow felons who got 1203.4 relief to stop registering, and then in the 1990s to no longer allow misdemeanants who got 1203.4 relief to stop registering. And when 290 was made retroactive, there was no question those people had to register again, some of them 20, 30, 40 years or more after they had been relieved of that.

          Many of those 16,819 people noted above who have failed to register are likely those who had been able to stop after getting relief via 1203.4 and don’t realize they were supposed to start registering again.

          This is what the law says. If the state overlooks that now, that does not mean another attorney general or local district attorney will not pick up on it and go after those who stopped registering after getting a COR. If they don’t get relief under the tiered registry bill now, they will be in jeopardy.

          This is just one of the major issues with the tiered registry bill. And now, it looks like Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey, the one this group praised for the deceitful registry bill, very possibly will be voted out of office for being too hard core. Former San Francisco DA George Gascon, considered to be liberal, stands a very good chance of beating her.

  2. SR

    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 of people having their records reduced, allowing for a lower tier assignment, but being caught placed into a higher tier because the information wasn’t relaid in time.

  3. TP

    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….

    • Unfair

      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 starting to rule that imposing it on certain misdemeanors in that case was unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment.

      This entire review process is unjustified. If you have been a good boy or girl for the horridly long time frames in the tiered registry bill, you have already proven beyond any doubt that you have reformed, no further review is justified, especially by a devious computer program

  4. Joe

    “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.

    • David

      @ 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.

      • Bluewall

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

        • Interested Party

          @Bluewall

          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.

    • New Person

      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?

    • Unfair

      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.

  5. Jimmy

    “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.

    • Mot

      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?

      • SR

        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.

      • David

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

    • Unfair

      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.

  6. USA

    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!

    • G4Change

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

      • TP

        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!

        • SR

          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.

      • Interested Party

        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.

        • TP @ Interested Party

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

        • Interested Party

          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?

        • TP

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

        • Nick

          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

      • Unfair

        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.

  7. HopingforHope

    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?

    • SR

      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 SOL since CA wants you to actively petition. If you don’t ask, they’re more than happy to keep you on the books.

    • Unfair

      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.

  8. ReadyToFight

    Uh…..by 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

  9. New Person

    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 by doing a background check through the Probation office, pay the lawyers to show up to argue over misdemeanors or dismissed cases that will clog up the courts, along with the judges presiding over the petitions.

    But here’s what I don’t get. If one had their case dismissed, then the courts have convened about the case. Having another court date to review your case that has already been dismissed appears to be double jeopardy. Being rewarded the 1203.4 equates to the courts stating you have pass a rehabilitative test. This secondary bite at the apple for the state makes no sense, nor did it when one had to apply for the CoR.

    The CoR was a pathway to regain your civil rights if one did not qualify for 1203.4. Then it all changed with the passing of 290.5 and 290.007. Registrants were forced to earn the 1203.4 and the CoR to get off the registry. Registrants are the only convict group where 1203.4’s benefits are negated.

    • Unfair

      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.

  10. David

    @ 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

    • Looking for Answers

      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.

      • Unfair

        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.

    • HopingForHope

      @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 relief, but rather, as anyone who lives in another state knows, we are still under the long arm of California’s lifetime requirement regardless of the tiers that might exist in the state where you live (unless you live in a lifetime state with absolutely no option for relief regardless of your circumstances, and it does sound like Florida would be one of them).
      I see other complications. What about the guy who has lived in several states over the years since leaving Calif.? Somehow the DOJ will need to check your record to make sure you’ve stayed clean, so what I’m thinking is that maybe you’ll list all of your addresses so they can do those checks in the states/counties/cities in which you’ve lived?
      At any rate, I intend to hire a lawyer to contact the DOJ, as you suggest. Too many “what if’s” to know exactly how this will work at this point in time, but I can definitely see situations where someone, somewhere, could easily get caught up in all of this because of the enormous labyrinth of laws, statutes and ordinances.

      • David

        @ 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 from all the states, and create one comprehensive set of overriding national registry requirements that every state must follow? If that were to happen, at least we would have uniformity. It’s all extremely (to say the least) frustrating. Some days, I want to encourage lawmakers to keep coming up with dumbass solutions to non-existent problems with new restrictions and requirements, such as “Registrants are not permitted to wear red
        socks on Tuesdays – to be punishable as a third degree felony with mandatory 5-year prison sentence, of course!) Eventually, if there are enough stupid, overly broad, vague, unintelligible, enforceable requirements, the registries will have to be changed or all together eliminated (as is, hopefully, happening in Michigan.)
        Again, apologies for my sharp tone.

        • HopingForHope

          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 the 20 years. It does appear to be a situation where you are subject to the longest possible duration, regardless of where you live. California is not going to let you off just because you move to some other state that is less severe, and nor is your home state going to let you off as long as you fall under the more strict requirement of the state from which you came. Kind of a catch-22.
          Personally, I think it’s crazy because if I had committed my offense here, I would have been off the registry 10 years ago. I haven’t lived in Calif for 30 years. That’s ancient history, or at least you would think. My opinion, once I lived here for X years, they should have taken me off. Maybe that’s 10 years or 20 years or even 30 years, I don’t know, but the point is I have long been a permanent resident of this state. I should be treated as such. If I were to move to ANOTHER state than that might be another matter, but once you’ve been in place for as long as I have, you should be treated no differently than anyone else in this state who committed the same offense.

        • R M

          @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 the feds, they would have ALL the duty in enforcing and legislating them; what kind of country would we have then?

      • AJ

        @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 and request removal based on CA PC such-and-such. With luck your State will look into it, but they will more likely say no and make you pursue it further. At this point you will probably need to contact CA for your updated tier, which could be a nightmare since you’re not on their list as an non-CA resident.

        It’ll most likely be a long, drawn-out process, but with some perseverance you should be able to get it taken care of without an attorney. Worst case you may need to take a vacation to CA, voluntarily register right away to get your tier info, then un-register and go home.

        • HopingForHope

          @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: You petition, and if you’re granted relief you are notified by CA DOJ (or whoever the notifying authority will be), and then you take that notification to your home state where I suspect they would first confirm it with CA, and then do their own background check to make sure you have no outstanding warrants or repeat offenses in your current state. I believe that’s how it will work. Seems to make the most sense that way.
          The only thing I don’t know is exactly how out of staters will petitition. Only 5 possible scenarios, as I see it: 1-petition with the court in CA where your case was adjudicated, 2-petition with the LED in CA where you were living at the time, 3- petition with your local LED in the state and city you live now, 4- petition with your current state’s DOJ (or whatever dept has authority over registration in your current state), or 5- petition directly with the CA DOJ. I think it will be 1. That would bring us into conformity with in-staters, plus they can conduct all the background checks needed to make sure you’re clean, as long as they have all of the addresses you’ve lived at since your departure from CA.
          We’ll find out soon enough.

      • Unfair

        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.

  11. BAM

    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.

    • David

      @ 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.

    • GRR

      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.

      • HopingForHope

        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.

      • Unfair

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

  12. mike r

    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 and three offenders. They are really going to attack level threes with a vengeance. Thank you everyone that supported the bill.:(

    • Bill

      @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 in your head.

      • Notorious D.I.K.ennerly

        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 those left on. That’s a pretty reasonable assumption. In other words, we can be sure that tiers will have the effect of diminishing the cohesion of our reform community to some, so far unknown, extent. I’m still not sure that the passage of tiers was a bad thing, however, only that it remains to be seen if it will provide an eventual way off for those of us stuck on Tier Three. It was a gamble (not that any of us had anything to say in the matter) that may or may not pay off. Certainly, the spirit of the times is one of reform and we can be optimistic about the future. It won’t be an easy fight, though.

      • Unfair

        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 we waiting for the hard on crime looneys to take power and then demand? No, we just support registration as long as it is Constitutional, as decided by the very right wing Supreme Court.

        • Bill

          @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 supported by Democrats too: like Bill Clinton signed for the Sex Offender Registry that you and I are subjected now, and also Obama signed Megan’s International Law that sends alerts to countries that we want to visit about our “sex offender” status! So if it makes you better our oppression is bipartisan…

          Don’t be so certain of the current outcomes being bad forever. If you do then you already are doing the oppressors’ work and let it happen.

  13. mike r

    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 every thing else is on my site. https://mllkeys20112011.wixsite.com/mysite
    Look at how long and how much effort I have put into fighting this with no professional help whatsoever, you would think someone would have jumped in at the appellant level, I think I can bitch a little.
    But whatever, I chose to do it. I hope you are right and it all works out.

    • New Person

      @ 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 what that prisoner did to two other prisoners convicted of sex crimes. You’ve already experienced vigilantism on you and your family in your suit, IIRC.

      Now, if you were on the registry before the legislation changed the registry from PD only to broadcasting to everyone, then you can easily identify the registry has gone beyond its stated aims, especially with the repeal of residency and presence restrictions, along with being banished from the streets on Halloween. But also, you can include the expansion to your passport.

      I still believe the registry is involuntary servitude because it is not applied to all convicts, like the jury duty and military service.

  14. mike r

    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 analysis of the laws and state actions, court precedent and 1000s hours research from multiple very intelligent people.
    It does not really matter how hard it will be to fight the law anywhere in the 9th district since it will be settled precedent in my case once and for all in this geographical area. This really angers me to no end as no professional legal help was provided in my case when it will be such a deciding case in the 9th.

    • Bill

      @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 then the government will be more amenable for more changes.

      It took 6.5 years for the Tier system to be pushed through. I figure that it might take at most the same amount of time for my offense to go back to Tier 1. Which means that when my 10 years come up I can petition to get off the Registry.

      In the meantime I’ve been educating myself about the laws and our system, writing letter campaigns to politicians, going to ACSOL meetings, and donate to OUR cause, which is our emancipation from the Registry. And when I do it, I do it with a grin and a belief that the system will break before I do.

      And belief is half the battle!

      • David

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

    • Roger H

      @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 of thousands of registrants get off the registry and prove that no crime wave will appear, that lets the air out of a crucial lie, which can lead to more people being allowed off the registry.

      But we need EVERYONE’S help. We can’t keep hiding in our rabbit holes, hoping the fox will go away. He won’t. In fact, he will keep biting us in our hole, as politicians keep doing with bad laws.

      We can’t just show hatred towards society and think that will change things, because that backs up society’s attitude of calling us evil and impossible to be a part of society.

      We need to show up, stand up, and speak up, but not just fighting legislation.

      To get rid of the registry, we can’t expect the courts to magically make it go away if we just offer the perfect logical arguments. The courts usually follow public opinion and the party who appointed them. Throughout history, the primary lasting gains that persecuted people groups have gained is by initiating GRASSROOTS change in society’s attitudes.

      Gays in the 60s and 70s came out of the closet to family, friends, neighbors, city councils, etc. and told them of the horror of what was being done to them. That made it harder for those to vote for politicians who persecuted them.

      We must do that.

      To learn how, I encourage everyone to come to our conference and take our breakout sessions on coming out of the registry closet to make lasting social change.

      • Will Allen

        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.

        • Roger H

          @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 who thought he was doing the right thing by giving Brock Turner a sentence that the public thought was too light.

          To vote for a major change that contradicts public belief, politicians MUST get cover from a major power like police organizations, major civil rights groups, etc. That’s what it took to get the original tiered registry as far as it did.

          However, the BEST way to move a mountain is to chip away at it its foundation with a coordinated strategy of incrementalism that doesn’t push too far during each step.

          People who haven’t actually been part of lobbying prefer to think of magical “just get rid of the registry with logical arguments” don’t realize that this is mainly an emotional war, not a logical one. The minority of politicians who believe the way registrants are treated now is wrong are filled with fear of going against the public.

          Look at the history of how African Americans gained their rights. The Civil Rights Act didn’t happen because one politician decided to write a bill and magically convince fearful politicians to risk doing what was right. Even though many politicians were sickened by what was happening to them, it required the US public to change their attitude towards blacks by seeing on TV what was happening to them when they stuck up for their rights. Americans wanted to feel good about themselves and what they saw and heard shamed them. The political pressure created by that culminated in the Civil Rights Act. Gandhi did the same thing to get the British public to cry out for their government to leave India.

          Gays shared with one person at a time to chip away at the terrible stereotypes and fear-baiting. It was slow work, but more and more society accepted them, swinging the pendulum until now one is running for President!

          The courts cannot be our only saviors, as I see repeatedly mentioned in the comments. Besides the fact that the courts general follow–not lead–public opinion, any case that did not have lot of lower court decisions supporting it would likely be thrown out by the Supreme Court.

          So let’s change things as fast as possible by sticking together and supporting ACSOL with money and signing up for Action Alerts today if you all haven’t already.

      • R M

        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” and I now can see each other unsupervised although I remain a danger to society in the public’s view.

    • James A

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

      • someone who cares

        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.

        • ohpleaseno

          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?

        • Nick

          Ohnoplease,

          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.

        • Should be unconstitutional!

          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 under the radar will now be punished, in essence…even despite having lived crime free, in my case, for over 20 years. This seems like it should be completely unconstitutional. Where’s the rationale that someone is all of a sudden a threat and should therefore be listed for all to see, when they’ve proven otherwise? I don’t understand how this isn’t something that’s being fought by Janice, considering MI’s registry is being hammered for the same type of stuff.

        • James A

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

  15. mike r

    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.

  16. mike r

    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 relief. If life is not worth living then anything goes.

    • Interested Party

      @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 argument of our opinions. Only time will tell which of our opinions will prove to be more accurate.

      I can also relate to your frustration of likely being placed in tier 3.

      While I am frustrated at the current system I am hopeful for those who will find relief. I expect many who get relief to no longer be as actively involved, but I doubt any of them will ever be in favor if increasing the registry system or even of the system itself. Additionally, those who find relief will also be a data set for justifying additional relief for those who remain subject to this injustice system.

      The new law is there for us all to see and speculate on. We can each read and guess how these changes will impact us. We can also choose whether we look at it with hope or dread. I can see reasons to have hope and also reason to dread its impact.

    • Bill

      @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 and come up with two different outlooks based on our separate core beliefs.

      Your statement saying, “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,” is indicative that your great attitude is contingent upon certain conditions. Totally uderstandable.

      But conditions are the hardest things to change and takes the longest time. And the way to get our emancipation is an uphill battle that does require enough convincing of the public to put pressure on politicians to reverse course. We are also fighting public perception too…

      Years of prison taught me to separate my attitude from the circumstances that I was in. Meaning I didn’t let my situation and the ongoing BS of prison politics get me down. That and patience not only helped me through those years but also saw an opportunity to have my sentence reduced by a year which I did.

      I realized that if I can get through all that bullcrap and be fine then this current stage of life is easy! Yeah there are still challenges but I can still find optimism and hope…not to mention I have more tools and resources out here to combat this Registry.

  17. someone who cares

    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.

    • HopingForHope

      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.

      • someone who cares

        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 now the Sex Offenders. People we never thought would end up on the registry. People we trusted and who deal with our children on a daily basis. It really just boils down to common sense. Over and over again, this has to be pounded into their brains, and hopefully, one day it will make sense to them.

      • R M

        Not in NJ or Ga

      • New Person

        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.

  18. Art

    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 with corruption and special interests.

    • The Static-99R Is A Scam

      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 end up hurting a lot of people. Like the polygraph, which is required for the “successful completion of a Sex Offender Management Board-certified sex offender treatment program,” the Static-99R scam is simply junk science (which is probably why its data is protected by its “developers” and the government like Area 51). And, as the Scam-99R’s very own Coding Rules state:

      “Static risk assessments estimate the likelihood of recidivism at the time of release and we expect they would be valid for approximately two years.”

      • New Person

        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?

      • ed

        the scam 99 is sickening

  19. HopingForHope

    @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.

  20. TP @ Roger H

    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.

    • Roger H

      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!

      • Tp

        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.

  21. CA

    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 changed.

    Feedback is welcome 🙂

    • TS

      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.

    • ed

      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?????

      • Roger H

        @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.

      • ed

        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

      • Nick

        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 that way.

        • AO @ Nick

          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.

        • Nick

          AO,

          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.

  22. mike r

    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 dog a bare bone that very few will crack smart ? How is punishing people that have already fought and got relief by putting them back on the registry fair or beneficial? How is letting people off whom truly may very well be dangerous simply because of their charges or the pleas they took beneficial to anyone other than the few? How is breaking down a registry to make it harder to fight against a good idea? How is it that a person who fought it till the end in court whom received the max sentence (and charges simply because he fought it) and is still a non-violent, one-time ex-offender (and a non-contact offender at that) from incident that occurred nearly 2 decades ago being put in a tier three designation beneficial to anyone?

    Debbie downer? I guess I am on this subject at this time and in theses circumstances.
    And believe me, I am just waiting for that tier designation to hit me and I am filing in state court for my rights and not begging the court to review my case on some set of arbitrary guidelines made up by these unscrupulous attorneys and corrupt lawmakers. Because guess what, unlike the uneducated laypeople that bought into this scam unfair BS of “please can I use MY COURTS? attitude” when they are just that, OUR COURTS and OUR RIGHTS for redress, I will use OUR COURTS again and fight it until the end again regardless what anyone outside of the judicial branch claims for criteria (with no professional help AGAIN).

    • New Person

      ====
      “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 you from being seen online via Megan’s List. But this new tiered law is removing, or rather impairing, the obligation of the contract made. Hmmm…

      • AO

        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.

  23. mike r

    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 will have to do it again, I guess I should look at it in a positive light that when they designate me as a tier three I can use that as a projection of dangerousness by the gov., which is and has been considered unconstitutional with court precedent without some kind of administrative or judicial processes to make that determination.

    • @ Mike R (steve)

      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.

      • Gralphr

        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.

  24. NotReally

    @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 truly wish you luck there.

    In the mean time, as long as the government subjects the innocent to the registry, the guilty will have little leverage and little leeway to complain.

    • New Person

      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 all citizens who should be free be free.

      • NotReally

        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.

        https://www.huffpost.com/entry/scalia-death-penalty_n_5756362

        https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/law-july-dec02-scotus_11-13

        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 convicted of the most horrendous crimes. That is when the arrogance of rush to judgement is most dangerous.

  25. mike r

    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 one knows without any risk assessments. After all, I have heard it from the sources mouth on here from someone that will most likely get relief that the registry is the only thing keeping them from re-offending.

    My big question is, explain to me how this increases public safety or how putting thousands back on the registry after they have earned their freedom from it and designating thousands more non-violent, non-contact first and one time offenders in the worst of the worst tier, and creating a possibility that a very limited number of others may have a chance off (if big nanny lets them-which an educated guess says is BS) after begging the courts and DAs (especially when everyone can already petition the courts without any legislative permission or arbitrary perimeters), how this is a step forward giving us something that each and everyone of us already posses, the right to petition the courts for redress.

    A serious and simple question I believe….

    • Interested Party

      @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 needs to be fixed. The numbers of potential people who will be relieved of having to be registered exceeds 50% of the total population of people on the registry.

      There is no clear evidence, yet about how simple or arduous the process will be. Your opinion is that this promised relief will be much more difficult then promised – that opinion is understandable but that does not make it a fact.

      To my knowledge and reading no one is placed back on the registry – some who were removed from the public registry are being placed onto the public registry, but they were still required to register.

      The next point I think you brought up is public safety … I think the vast majority of us on this sight have reached the conclusion that registry is not a tool for public safety.

      If you are looking for someone to quote the ideas of those responsible for passing this bill – then the argument is reducing the number of people being monitored allowing the limited resources to be more focused on those deemed to be the greatest threat.

      One of the greatest problems with that argument is how does the government or anyone make an accurate assessment of an individuals risk – my personal opinion is there is no good risk assessment.

      Finally to your question – how is the registry better then the current system? The registry provides a path where a majority of people on the current lifetime registration for all have a path to get off of being forced to register. How successful people will be in getting removed remains to be seen.

      You state that everyone currently can petition to be removed. Do you know of anyone successful doing this? To my knowledge a very limited number of people can petition for a CoR and then even successful an even smaller number of those granted the CoR were eligible for removal from registration requirements. The other path that is open is an appeal for a pardon – only recently the first pardon was granted relieving someone from the requirement to register. Sadly the pardon is for a dead individual.

  26. USA

    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 2) affect individuals? (How about someone crime free for 20 years?) 3. Who will be put on the website in 2022? Let’s (some people are tired of the rants/attacks) have an intelligent discussion? Does anyone have both intelligent and valid input?

    • Nick

      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 implement, but this is why CASOMB needs to be more specific. A lot of people have a lot to lose, and others will benefit greatly.

    • New Person

      @ 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.

      Your comment is odd though as it kinda supports Mike R’s stance. You wrote, “Should everyone be affected by others poor choices?”

      With that quote you are proving Mike R’s divide and conquer philosophy against the registry. Before this tiered system was passed, you were in the same boat as everyone who made a poor choice as everyone became a lifetime registrant. Now, you do not care about others as you see a lifeline for your own self.

      What is baffling is if you are crime free for 20 years, earned a 1203.4, and reduced your felony to a misdemeanor, then why did you not attempt to earn a CoR? You could have done that at the 10-year mark, unless the 20 year crime free information was simply asking for a friend. Were you rejected from earning the CoR to relieve from the registry? And if so, then what was their reasoning? And if they did give you a reason, then should you not have accomplished those feat by now to try the CoR again?

      I’m happy to see California change from a lifetime only penalty to a tiered penalty. Yet, the registry is still a penalty that should be identified as punishment as the online community is world wide for all to see. Also, the SCOTUS Smith v Doe was decided upon using false facts. But back to the tiered penalty that was passed, it too was not using any scientific research in its breakdown. The state can use Dr. Hanson’s Static-99 research work, but omit Dr. Hanson’s research on maximum length of monitoring of 17 years. There should not exist a lifetime penalty if based upon science and research if there is to be a tiered penalty.

      In the future, maybe far future, I hope to see that the registry be ruled unconstitutional by the SCOTUS as they give a mea culpa for creating this unnecessary hysteria based upon using false facts and hate mongering.

      • someone who cares

        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!

        • AO @ Someone

          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.

        • New Person

          Tiered bill link: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB384

          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 of any risk assessments pertains to out-of-state registrants or tier three offenders.

          The PDF for CA DOJ's frequently asked question link: https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/csor/registrant-faqs.pdf

          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… "

          Simple research online provides answers.

          tl;dr version:

          i) A 17b reduction will put identify as a tier one offender.
          ii) A 1203.4 will exclude you from Megan's Law listing online.
          iii) A risk assessment in only utilized for tier three offenders or out-of-state convictions.

          If there's an updated version of the bill or I mis-read something, then feel free to correct it for USA, who does not want to do any research.

        • @new person

          @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.

        • New Person

          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 page 5:
          “(i) 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, or other official court document that clearly demonstrates that the registrant was the victim’s parent, stepparent, sibling, or grandparent and that the crime did not involve either oral copulation or penetration of the vagina or rectum of either the victim or the registrant by the penis of the other or by any foreign object.”

          I’ll break down the factors, which are separated by commas and ‘or’.

          1. 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,

          2. … or other official court document that clearly demonstrates that the registrant was the victim’s parent, stepparent, sibling, or grandparent and that the crime did not involve either oral copulation or penetration of the vagina or rectum of either the victim or the registrant by the penis of the other or by any foreign object.”

          I hope this helps shines the light that 1203.4 expungement (which designates successfully completing probation) and Megan’s List.

        • @New Person

          @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 related registrants, since it exposes the victim. In fact, my crime, 647.6, is one that was specifically targeted and said to be escaping via a loophole. (If I remember correctly)

        • New Person

          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 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)

          2. … or other official court document that clearly demonstrates that the registrant was the victim’s parent, stepparent, sibling, or grandparent and that the crime did not involve either oral copulation or penetration of the vagina or rectum of either the victim or the registrant by the penis of the other or by any foreign object.”

          .. Inside the parenthesis is just asking for proof you successfully completed probation.

          To add more context, if you went to the pdf link I provided, there is a second option.

          (i) Successfully completed probation or a family member etc…

          (ii) Is on probation or a family member etc…
          …. If registrant commits a violation on probation resulting in incarceration, then the exclusion or application for exclusion is terminated.

          It is the second option (ii) where if you fail probation, then your application from exclusion is revoked. That means the moment you’re on probation, then you are excluded (or have an application to be excluded). Once you successfully complete probation that you are permanently excluded.

          Please note, your offense must qualify and you have to be granted probation/successfully complete probation to be eligible for internet exclusion. Scroll to 290.46 (e) to get the full details. They even go into detail of what a “successfully completed probation” is defined in that that section.

          I hope that helps. If not, the pdf link as an email link that you can ask them about it. I’m not a lawyer, but I’m good at English and have slept at a Holiday Inn Express before.

    • Benny

      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.

  27. USA

    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.

    • mike r

      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 character in that statement. Watch how badly you attack with no facts and just opinions based on your own experiences.

      • mike r

        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.

  28. Aero1

    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 the courts or the District Attorney’s office you walk.
    Anybody who petitions that does not qualify those are the petitions the DA will be contesting If you think about it it’s really not that complicated.
    I think everybody can totally understand the frustration of being on the registry for life
    The truth is a lot of people who will remain on the registry after this law passes were already labeled a tier 3 so when I read their comments of anger and frustration that 50% of the people on the registry will be removed it just baffles me.
    Why should everybody suffer for other people’s crimes 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 and for that reason I think a tier level is very necessary.
    Especially as parent or Grand parent I would like to be notified whenever violent or habitual offenders move into my neighborhood but do I need to be notified of a 18 year old senior in high school dating 14 year old freshman 23 years ago “NO I DONT”

    • Interested Party

      @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 violent crimes have been placed in the tier three level which you seem to indicate is a good thing.

      The problem for me with the registry concept is that it does not accomplish the most positive way of looking at the goal of the legislation. The best view of the registry in my opinion is that it is designed to focus law enforcements efforts on the most dangerous and most likely to reoffend. The simple problem with this goal is it has no valid way to classify or determine who those people are. Without being able to identify those who really are a risk – then there is no justification.

    • SR

      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.

    • Will Allen

      @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 to harass me into accepting a terrible plea deal like they normally do. I’ve also been able, for over a year, to petition the criminal regime where I live to be removed from the Registry. I haven’t yet, for various reasons. It doesn’t really matter why, but one of the key reasons that I haven’t is because I neutralized the Registries – for the most part – long ago. They are only able to harass me in limited ways. True, it is in ways that might eventually get innocent people murdered, but I digress.

      You said, “when I read their comments of anger and frustration that 50% of the people on the registry will be removed it just baffles me”. Why would that baffle you? I don’t think their anger/frustration is because people will get off of the Registries, I think it is because they won’t.

      However, I will say that it does anger me when I hear that a person is going to get off of the Registries and yet they think Registries should exist. I think that ALL people who think there should be Registries should be listed. And I don’t want those people being removed from the Registries. So perhaps that is the anger/frustration you are hearing.

      Your last paragraph is exactly what the Registry Terrorists say. I think you need to remain Registered. And that is why a tiered Registry will never be any more legitimate than the Registry today is. No moral American can support either.

      • 666

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

        • C

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

        • Will Allen

          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.

    • Gralphr

      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 dangerous since I was labeled a tier 3? Should someone such as myself be on a registry for life!!!!???

    • New Person

      @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 barrier where you are told you are a free citizen, but simultaneously still remain under custody with blanket restrictions. It’s an extended punishment disguised under the nomenclature of a statutory scheme. It is a scarlet letter, but people seem to think it’s only a story that doesn’t pertain to people today.

      The SCOTUS ruled incorrectly and its ruling was based upon a false fact. People only have one life to live and terms such as a decade, two decades, or a lifetime reveals the lack of rehabilitative and compassionate efforts of the courts and public.

      The registry reminds me of the movie a Clockwork Orange. Birthdays are a negative association nowadays. I’m a tier one (according to the bill) and will apply on July 1, 2021. Yet, despite being out of non-registration custody for several years, those extra years have prolonged the shell of a normal person I once was. I feel for future tier 2s and tier 3s. Once you’ve paid your dues, then you should be completely free.

      The registry is unconstitutional as it has gone beyond it’s statutory aims, which was set forth from false facts.

    • JM from wi

      @ 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.

      • Mot

        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

        • Will Allen

          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.

      • R M

        @ 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?

        • Will Allen

          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 I’ve done it either.

          A person can make piles of money messing with real estate. I think Registration can be used to help pad the profit margins as well.

          Additionally, I feel like most of the “residency restrictions” nonsense is nothing more than a ploy to protect $$$. Wealthy people are all about NIMBY and they are going to protect their $$$. Even if they have to put families in the street. Most people are scum.

        • jm from wi

          https://www.nber.org/digest/jun06/w12253.html

          https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/86151/IJRC_Navarro-Rabe-Hemp_vol4-issue1_pp86-109.pdf

          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.

        • R M

          @ JM from wi: The link https://www.nber.org/digest/jun06/w12253.html provides no statistics.

          The second link you provided (https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/86151/IJRC_Navarro-Rabe-Hemp_vol4-issue1_pp86-109.pdf ) references a link of https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255720860_The_Effect_of_Proximity_to_a_Registered_Sex_Offender'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.

        • R M

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

        • Will Allen

          @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 haven’t paid attention to it.

          I do certainly believe that having a Person Forced to Register (PFR) live nearby does depress real estate prices. Seems pretty clear to me and I’ve seen a lot of evidence of it over the years. There are actually a lot of people who pay attention to the Registries. And they don’t want to live next door to an PFR. I’ve heard people say it directly. Many people. So the market for a home is reduced, for sure.

          I’ve also heard real estate agents, numerous times, tell people that they are trying to sell a home to something like, “sex offenders can’t live near you due to the nearby swimming pool”. They certainly say it is a selling point.

          I’ve been Registered for over 2 decades and I’ve talked to quite a number of neighbors who have tried to sell their homes near me. They’ve told me it matters. Very recently, my immediate neighbor had a difficult time selling his home. I talked to him about it a number of times. It is a very, very expensive home and he and I both think it affected the price that he got. He and I talked about me moving out of my home while he was trying to sell his. I would have moved out, not Registered it as my home any longer, and then once he sold his home, moved back in and Registered again. I would have done it if he would have asked me to but he was quite worried that he would be sued for fraud. I wasn’t particularly worried for myself. Probably/perhaps he could have gotten away with it without be sued, but he had moral problems with it as well. Needless to say, he is not a fan of Registries.

          I don’t have any doubts that PFRs reduce home values. Which is why PFRs should move next door to scumbag legislators, if you don’t mind living near scumbags. I don’t think I could. So maybe just buy the place, Register it, but don’t really live there much.

        • R M

          @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.

        • R M

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

    • NotEasilyOffended

      @Aero1

      “… 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.

  29. 666

    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

  30. jm from wi

    @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.

    • R M

      @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.

      • Will Allen

        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.

  31. someone who cares

    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 way, those who still commit crimes that will land them in Tier 3 were forewarned, and they may deserve it? However, those who are not currently on the public site should stay that way.

  32. USA

    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.

    • Gralphr

      “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 sting with a cop) is somehow better or “not as bad” as someone who actually did something? No they look at ALL of US as the same. It doesn’t matter if someone is a tier 1 or a tier 3, their rights are being violated and they should receive fair treatment. 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” we will always fail and receive nothing more but more ex post facto punishments. We have to work TOGETHER!!!!!!!

    • Bill

      @USA

      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.

  33. mike r

    “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 going to be put in tier 3. And I have not been on here for weeks hardly at all stupid and only to come on here and find you still bashing on my character the first post I read from you. You are pathetic and if anyone deserves and needs to be on a registry it is you, self-proclaimed violent offender that claims the registry is the only thing that keeps you from re-offending. Even Will Allen would have to admit someone that makes those claims needs to be monitored in some way, maybe not a registry but somehow. Scary part is this guy will probably get relief from this joke of a new registry just as he worked the system to get his violent felonies reduced even though he never did time and definitely has not self rehabilitated as many others have.

  34. mike r

    “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 about himself way back for those that do not know) that pretty much claims he will re-offend as soon as he is comfortably off the registry. The tiering is not only completely unfair and BS, it proves my point that it is dangerous since somebody with a self-proclaimed proclivity to re-offend may get off the registry because there are no risk assessments or any attempt to weed out those that are truly dangerous like him.

  35. mike r

    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 better you are than others. That could not be farther from the truth pal, you are definitely someone I would NEVER want to know or even meet, unless it was in a back ally somewhere for sure (and I am not a violent person, but some people just deserve to get the shit kicked out of them sometimes. Just like many would say I needed for what I did, at least I did my time, paid my price and learned my lesson, and did not skate through the system on violent felonies, learned nothing and claims he will re-offend if not for the registry-I just cannot let that go)

  36. mike r

    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 anyone will get the full wrath of this corrupt legislature and corrupt system.. I will say it again, thank you everyone that supports a tiered registry that does not use any actual risk assessments before placing people in their designated tiers while putting thousands of those whom have EARNED their way off the registry back on..

    • Bill

      @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. Would the Civil Rights movement succeeded without sufficient support of the people and the media?

      And you need money. Lots of it to pay lawyers and court fees to fight for a cause.

      Now let’s look at our situation:

      1) 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. Media for the most part are ignorant too. Public opinion about Registrants are mired in ignorance.

      2) Lawmakers are nearly as clueless and even if they do understand will not touch it with a 100 foot pole in fear of career suicide.

      3) A handful of lawyers running on donations fighting on our behalf.

      Do you honestly believe we can overthrow the Registry with these factors? The fact that ACSOL was able to get CA to roll back on some of their Registry is an amazing feat in itself.

      To be clear this new Tier Registry won’t help me at all. My Federal CP conviction will put me on Tier 3 coming 2021. Yet I support all the efforts of ACSOL because that was a first major step to eliminate the Registry. Other steps like Lobby Day was to push the Registry back even further til eventually the Registry is no more.

      But to get there will require public support by way of raising awareness through social media, video awareness campaigns, and even word of mouth with friends and family.

      Only then will politicians come out to support us in ending the Registry.

      As you must be aware we don’t have those things to make that happen, so our progress is incremental at best. When the politicians see that the sky hasn’t fallen after Registrants are coming off the Registry they will be more amenable to further changes that would lead to its abolishment.

      So don’t be a Debbie Downer and put us down for supporting this current endeavor. This is only part of the process, not the endgame. There are things happening in Michigan that could help us even further, so stay tuned!

      • mike r

        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 going to convince the general public that registries should go, there is no way you are going to convince legislators to step up and change the laws for the better and not their own personal gains without a court order. Michigan is proof of that. Public opinion and the legislature had zero to do with what is happening in Michigan and the court room there.

        • Bill

          @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 can technically be sucked into it on even BS charges.

          Imagine a video campaign titled, “Dear Future Sex Offenders of America. You don’t know it yet but there are laws in the works to snare you in a system of lifetime oppression…and the net that is cast is getting wider and wider, you should be concerned that you and your loved ones could be next!”

          And yes, Mike, I am working on a series of video campaign ideas that I want to unleash to the world in order to appeal humanity’s fear of a police state. You can say all you want on this point but my counter to that is “You won’t really know unless you try.”

          As for your other counter, “there is no way you are going to convince legislators to step up and change the laws for the better” I submit to you the Tier Registry (that we know you loathe) that was by the work of Janice and team.

          As much you argue against it even you have to concede that some Registrants will benefit this, which is non-existent with this current Registry. I know I still won’t benefit with my federal CP charge but I have hope that constant Lobbying and further pushing the awareness will erode even the most stubborn of opponents.

      • mike r

        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, as long as it saves even one??????

        • mike r

          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 because I used the internet to talk to them, hence 288.2 tier 3…………… BS man………. But whatever, like I stated I am going state court as soon as they designate me in a tier system. Guess we all have our own ways of fighting this pot of crap we got.

        • Bill

          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…

  37. Jackson

    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 file sharing or distribution, most likely I would have been charged with a misdemeanor in the Goden State. I know can’t rewrite the past, folks, but I can try and make the remainder of my life better. Wisconsin is so messed up that they consider more than one count (picture) of cp possession as a repeat offense, therefore they put me and other offenders (with more than one count) on lifetime gps even AFTER supervision.
    But not to worry folks. When I get off supervision in two years, I’m leaving this shithole state of Wisconsin and heading for Massachusetts where their courts have long decided that cp possession is not a “child sex crime.” It’s considered just a sex crime and ALL first time cp possession offenders are automatically put under tier 1 (non public information only available to law enforcement) The Mass registry only lists tier 2 and 3 offenders. Plus in 2015, The Mass court banned towns from passing presence and residency ordinances plus the state has a ban the box law. I don’t see any of this stuff being overturned because Mass has long been (since Kennedy) a liberal democratic state and that’s very unlikely to change in the future. Even the current GOP governor won’t touch this issue again. The high court made their decision.
    The only area I’ll probably get jammed up (And I’ve brought up this before on this forum) is I’ll be listed for life on the Wisconsin registry (yes they never remove you just like in Florida) which makes it easy for victim’s rights industry folks like family watchdog and city-data to get a hold of my Wisconsin info and put it on their site. I actually can see family watchdog doing this to registrants in the town in Mass I’m planning on moving too. Although those tier 1 registrants aren’t listed on the Mass state site, family watchdog has them listed as “unmappable” by zipcode and they all have out of state offenses. And guess where 90% of those folks caught their offenses? Florida!
    Now obviously these poor saps updated their address with Florida. I plan to only register in the state I’m required to register because I don’t want Wisconsin or any other looky lous knowing what town or zipcode I live in. Now it’s debatable if I’d get in trouble with my soon to be former state of Wisconsin, however I don’t plan on setting foot in this landfill again…it will always remain a fly over state for me. I want to enjoy my retirement in peace but I will say this. No matter if I’m tier 1, not listed or not on the registry anymore, I will always have love for my fellow brothers and sisters in the registry struggle. Peace

  38. mike r

    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.

    • Josh

      @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.

      • mike r

        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….

  39. USA

    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

  40. mike r

    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 are faced with facts that shatter your opinions.

  41. USA

    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 believe? Sad. I think and firmly believe the tier system is a miracle. It’s not perfect, but it’s not 2021 and changes will occur. If anyone (the registration isn’t going away) disagrees and is completely opposed to it, that means they are tier 3 or they have a long history of committing crimes! Bottom line. Final! Go ahead and write 3? 4? Responses with multiple paragraphs! Your comments (I don’t read this jailhouse attorney want to be) stuff any longer. I count the paragraphs and move on. Check back in next Wednesday. I feel sorry for you select few. This could be such a great blog. Be miserable

    • New Person

      @ 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. Yet, it has not changed your psychology all these years, despite belonging to the registrant umbrella. You still punch down on others, despite belonging to the registrant umbrella. That is shameful, but I’m happy that you can post it. The only way to combat bad speech is with good speech.

      One can support the tiered registry. One can support the tiered registry and not support the registry scheme simultaneously. One can not support the tiered registry and not support the registry scheme. There are probably many gradient thoughts between the three mentioned.

      I’m not here to change your mind, nor do I care to change it. I will be helpful in answering your queries.
      Yet your wrongful thoughts should be rebutted so others can identify you punching down on fellow registrants, I mean that in a figurative sense.

      Remember, you couldn’t comprehend the text bill to answer your own queries. I answered them for you.

  42. mike r

    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.

    • Mot

      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

      • mike r

        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.

        • Mot

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

  43. TMZ

    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!

  44. someone who cares

    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.

  45. mike r

    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 in tier 3 as well as will be labeled violent offenders according to this bill or proposition or whatever the hell you want to call it, that is sure to pass. Next we will all be evaluated for SVP status, just a prediction. After all you know the state wants to expand the civil commitment that is based on lies and propaganda and which the actual evidence that supports not having civil commitment has been conveniently squashed by the state employees throughout the history of the program.
    I will check it out any way thought MOT, appreciate the heads-up on this.

  46. USA

    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.

  47. mike r

    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.

  48. steve

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

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 *

.