ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: May 16 – Phone [recording], June 13 – Phone, July 11, August 15 details
Oct 10 and 11 – Conference (Los Angeles),

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

2020 ACSOL Conference – Postponed to Oct 10-11

National

MI: Federal judge invalidates portions of SORA

A federal judge has issued a ruling that invalidates portions of Michigan’s Sex Offender Registry Act (SORA) that are unconstitutional.

U.S. District Court Judge Robert Cleland issued the decision on Friday in a lawsuit that argued the SORA was unconstitutional. Full Article

Court Decision

Press Release from the Michigan ACLU

Related

https://mitchellhamline.edu/sex-offense-litigation-policy/2020/02/14/john-doe-et-al-v-richard-snyder-e-d-mich-2020/

Join the discussion

  1. BM

    Anyone have anything to add regarding today’s conference?? Interested to hear!

  2. Nick

    I guess this is the first time the lawmakers have had an excuse they can hang their hats on. I hate to say it but I think they’ll ride this horse til it’s long dead and I will totally surprised if itwill come to an end in 6 months.

  3. Joe

    I think the best thing the ACLU and Michigan can do is push this past the election, I will wait with baited breath, and it will turn out better for us after November, thoughts? I’ve had to register for 18 years so far, what’s 7 more months, if it gives us a better chance… especially since msp isn’t even making pre 2011 people register.

    • Bobby S.

      @Joe, are you nuts I will have 28 years on this stupid thing on 6-19-20. Speaking for me, and maybe a few others on here they know who they are, are getting tired of the bull, and the excuses and the runaround and the continuing kicking of the can down the street crap. Cleland needs to make his decision soon, and hopefully, but unlikely just the registry is temporarily shut down until the two parties come together remove the people that need to be removed now, then rewrite the registry to where it meets constitutional muster. Pushing this entire thing past November my a$$, enough is enough. It’s time for the Judge and the ACLU to start playing hard ball with those clowns in the legislature. Just my opinion.

    • Josh

      @Joe….I totally disagree with you….What’s 7 more months? Really? What is waiting for another election gonna fix? We’ve been through at least 2 election cycles in the last 4 years and the only good thing that has happened to us has been Whitmer & Nessel. We’re incredibly fortunate that Bill Schuette didn’t get elected because what little ground we’ve gained in practical terms wouldn’t exist. I’m really sick of the ACLU not pushing their advantage. Affecting actual, practical, & tangible change seems to be just outside their ability…they’ve said themselves(ACLU) that they want a bill THEY can live with. WE, US are the ones who have to live with the new statute…I know…devil’s advocate we should be thankful that they even bothered to stand up for us in the first place…And if you wanted to not be on a SOR you shouldn’t have committed a sex related offense….blah blah blah. Hopefully, judge Cleland rules in our favor for this interim order and the nice loophole us pre 2011 persons forced to register are enjoying continues until something permanent happens…some days are better then others for me when it comes to my outlook on this and this isn’t one of those good days…..#sickofthisshit……sorry for venting!

    • BM

      @ Joe

      Couldn’t agree more. With lawsuit won and just some formalities till final judgement (which we know from ruling is in our favor), with MSP, with Covid and with the ACLU on it, I too think kicking it past election will result in a better outcome. They have all the excuses to make it better and won’t have the political pressure. In 2 years till next election, a lot will be forgotten.

      • Josh

        @BM…..what political pressure? There is NONE now…..the makeup of the legislative body may change a little but they are all still politicians and none of them want come within 100 miles of this unless it’s to make things more restrictive or harsher. Their ONLY legislative effort to date has been around for 2 weeks and is virtually the same as we have right now with different language. They’re ALL going to toe the anti-sex offender line until the bitter end…This WILL BE DECIDED BY THE COURTS NOT THE LEGISLATURE!!!!!!!

        • ConfusedMan

          @Josh exactly. The registries exist because 1. they help B-list politicians keep their jobs 2. they’re too radioactive to touch. While there have been occasional allies in state government here in Michigan (Ann Arbor had a few, Mary Ann here in Detroit seemed like an ally, unfortunately her son just passed), registries are a bipartisan way to virtue signal to the electorate. Privately, I’m sure there are reservations—registries don’t improve safety, they can depress home values in upper middle class neighborhoods, they seem uncouth—but publicly we are, sadly, alone. Shockingly, Trump, to my knowledge, has never played the RSO card—but “more presidential” men, like Romney, McCain, and Clinton did. While I don’t count myself a Trump supporter, I have to say that respectful politics isn’t ever going to be on our side—we only have the courts or political outsiders.

  4. TnT

    Total B.S .……. Not sure how these jackAzzs keep getting away with this , Soon we will have to start our own movment against this state and the government who keep appling these unconstitutional laws agains the people in many cases years after a offence or a sentence has been served , 44,000 people in this state are F#@cked because of you , Not to mention the pain it inflicts of the families of the people on these lists , Its SICK how this keeps getting postponed the Aclu should have never kept putting sh!t off , I have watched this for over 25 years talked to the Aclu many many times over the years , wrote senators , state reps, attorney generals , governors , I couldn’t tell you how many letters , they keep saying the same B.S over and over again, year after year it sees to me both sides do NOTHING but drag their feet and postponement after postponement , The emotional roller coaster is so unjust and barbaric to so many of us and our families. I am really begging to wonder who is the Aclu really working for . Michigan politicians suck ! I hope u all coke on this virus “YOU CAUSED ” by not protecting the people instead waisting TAX PAYERS money and time fighting this kinda unconstitutional law… B.S !

    • Josh

      @Confused…..I do agree that you may come across a politician who will be seemingly sympathetic to your face and there may even be some who privately think that registries are wrong & unnecessary….That being said, no legislator is going to go on the record publicly and commit political suicide to protect us…..The only politician I’ve ever seen stick out their neck for us is our AG Dana Nessel. And I guarantee she’ll probably pay a heavy price for her stance the next time she runs for re-election. I can already envision the republican challenger’s attack ads on my television…..I do find it ironic that her assistant AG is still blasting away at us like he did in that memo for the temporary order last week. In my opinion, I do believe that this may be a tactic on Nessel’s part. Having her underling look like a totally unreasonable asshole in contrast to her personal support of registry reform in those MSC briefs gives them all plausible deniability. By all accounts, judge Cleland hasn’t looked very favorably on the assistant AG or the state’s “efforts”…..praying that continues and the interim order is great for us….

  5. TnT

    As far as the Aclu saying waist more time , year after year, writing these heartless ,soulless , spineless, dirty politicians letter after letter as their TAX paid secretaries pitch them over their shoulders into a trash can before the “SPINELESS ONE” ever even gets it on the desk to read. 44,000 registrant march on the steps of Lansings capita building is I believe the only way for CHANGE.

    • James I

      Seriously, TnT, this is about the only thing that will help us other than the courts….which we have seen to be ambivalent at best.

      44,000 people, even if all not RSO’s, meaning family members also there due to their harm, on the capitol steps in Lansing, or 100,000.00 in Sacramento…Yes, that would do the trick. (this visual would also help with the courts I’m sure).

      The question is how to do this? How to gather a real commitment from this many people? (a few hundred might actually be harmful). But yes, a real mass demonstration, RSO’s, family and friends flooding the capitol streets for a single day would….be very productive!

      Some day this will come to be.

      Best Wishes, James I

  6. TImP

    We need people on the SOR to step up to help us get this done. Understand that the court does NOT write laws so a new law has to come from the Michigan Legislators. The 60 days does not start until the Covid 19 emergency is over. The bill will take about 6 months to fight, this bill is not what we agreed to and it is very bad bill. Please join the fight.

    *****If you would like to testify before a committee of the State House or Senate when we have a bill we can support please provide the following information; your full name, your full address, your phone number, your age and the age of the victim at the time of the offense, the number of years you were assigned to the registry prior to 2011, your tier level now, and very short summary of the crime itself. Send this information to the ACLU at intern@aclumich.org

    This will NOT be a chance to retry your case but it will be a chance to talk about the issues the Registry has caused you and your family. Also stopping you from becoming a productive member of this State.

    *****Or if you just want to help and get on a team of Volunteers please send us your full name, full address including zip code, and your phone number and we will add you to our volunteer list at intern@aclumich.org

    Please also understand that we can not answer questions here. To ask questions or get involved go to intern@aclumich.org

    Thank you Tim P ACLU of Michigan SOR Specialist

    • Jo

      Seriously Tim p., This law has been unconstitutional since 2016 . We are all sick and tired of the games by the state of Michigan. Nobody cares about our stories. The State has broken the law and doesn’t want to admit it. It’s the same old story. I got a 25 year sentence in 1999 for a misdemeanor. In 2007 I had my conviction set aside but still have all the same requirements as someone who didn’t have a conviction set aside. Our stories don’t matter to anyone. Let’s focus on what unconstitutional laws were broken by the state of Michigan and continue to be broken. The ACLU has a chance to make history here by putting pressure on the State of Michigan and I believe the other states will follow suit. We all have to start thinking (outside the box) for this to work.

  7. guy

    Anyone got anything in the mail yet?

    • Josh

      @guy…NOPE, nor do I expect one. The agreement as I understand it, is that there will be no final judgment ordered until 14 days after the end of the COVID crisis which apparently is decided by our governor who just so happens to be pushing for a 70 day extension to her state of emergency/disaster order. If She gets it…we’ll be looking at 6 more months or so at least

      • Blake

        Well the judge ruled in the aclu favor again. They cant enforce any of the unconstitutional stuff on us.

      • Josh

        @All..temporary order has been issued! No registry requirements for duration of COVID crisis!

      • BM

        Everyone – there is a 6 page interim order that basically says:

        The order does the following:
        Law enforcement must immediately stop enforcing registration, verification, school zone violations, and fee violations in connected with Michigan’s sex offender registry law from February 14, 2020 until the COVID-19 crisis has ended. NOTE: this order enjoins the enforcement of the registry but does NOT stop law enforcement from continuing to use the registry.
        The COVID-19 crisis is considered ended:
        When there is no longer an operative federal or state executive order or legislative act declaring a state of emergency, or
        When the Court determines that the conditions giving rise to the need for this Order no longer apply, and
        Registrants are notified of their duties under Michigan’s registry law going forward.
        Within seven (7) days of this Order (April 13, 2020):
        Michigan State Police shall post notice of this Order on their website and other locations where it can be seen widely by registrants.
        The Prosecuting Attorneys Association Coordinating Council must provide notice of this Order to all Michigan’s Prosecuting Attorneys.
        Michigan State Police must provide notice of this Order to the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police and to the Michigan Sheriffs’ Association, who must send notice to all law enforcement personnel who are responsible for registry enforcement matters.
        The attorneys involved in this case must report to the court every 30 days on the progress of this order.

        I received full order from Tim at ACLU just a few minutes ago.

        • G4Change

          Oh wow, this is HUGE!!! Is there anywhere we can find a copy of this interim order?
          Also, is there a recording available from Friday’s phone conference?

        • BM

          Everyone- Direct from Pacer:

          INTERIM ORDER DELAYING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT, PRELIMINARILY ENJOINING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, AND DIRECTING PUBLICATION
          The court enters this Interim Order after consultation with counsel to provide direction to registrants and law enforcement while the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic state of emergency continues and renders effectively impossible the entry of a final order providing complete relief.
          As explained herein, the relief provided in this Order is temporary and specifically tied to the state of emergency declarations, state and federal.
          This Interim Order does not constitute a final judgment in this case.
          WHEREAS on February 14, 2020, this court granted Plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment as to Counts I – IV of the second amended complaint and entered declaratory and injunctive relief on all of Plaintiffs’ claims, including ordering that Michigan’s Sex Offenders Registration Act (SORA), Mich. Comp. Laws § 28.721 et seq., is null and void as to pre-2011 registrants, and
          WHEREAS, after consultation and guidance from counsel, the court delayed the effective date of its decision until 60 days after the entry of the final judgment in order
          (1) to “allow time for the legislature to craft and enact a new statute,” and (2) to ensure that registrants, prosecutors’ offices, and law enforcement would likewise receive notice of the order before the injunctive relief took effect and
          WHEREAS after further consultation with counsel, the court granted the parties’ joint request for an extension until March 20, 2020 to submit a proposed judgment (as well as proposed notices and a description of when and how they would be served) intended to permit reasonably swift enforcement of the judgment, and
          WHEREAS by March 20, 2020, the global pandemic caused by the COVID-19 virus had emerged and substantially disrupted all aspects of everyday life, severely restricting the abilities of government and making it virtually impossible for the Michigan State Police (MSP) Sex Offender Registration (SOR) Unit to complete the steps necessary to implement a final judgment, and
          WHEREAS counsel for Defendants report that the MSP has not yet identified the members of the ex post facto subclasses and cannot say when it will be able to determine which registrants belong to those subclasses (and are therefore entitled to relief under Count IV), which is necessary in order to identify which registrants will no longer be subject to SORA, and which registrants will be subject to a more limited SORA, and
          WHEREAS counsel for Defendants further report that it would be effectively impossible for the MSP SOR Unit to mail the 44,000 individual notices to class members within the time frames originally contemplated because MSP SOR Unit employees are required to work from home, and lack access to certain computing
          infrastructure and input from senior decision-makers and state employees in other departments (e.g., Technology, Management and Budget) necessary to implement the court’s order, and
          WHEREAS the parties report that although remedial legislation has been proposed, the state legislature is not meeting in regular session, and committee hearings have been cancelled or postponed bringing legislative processes to a near- standstill, and
          WHEREAS the parties report that numerous registrants attempting to report in person have been turned away based on a February 21, 2020 memorandum from the MSP sent to law enforcement agencies instructing them not to take actions such as verifying registration unless the agency could confirm that the registrant’s offense occurred after April 11, 2011 and
          WHEREAS the widespread closure of police stations to the public in response to the COVID-19 pandemic makes in-person compliance with SORA effectively impossible for registrants, and would in any event be inconsistent with current physical isolation directives,
          NOW THEREFORE,
          IT IS ORDERED that any final judgment is hereby SUSPENDED for the duration of the current COVID-19 crisis. The “current COVID-19 crisis” shall be considered ended:
          (a) when there is no longer an operative federal or state executive order or legislative act declaring a state of emergency, or
          (b) when the Court determines that the conditions giving rise to the need for this Interim Order no longer apply.
          IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants and their agents are PRELIMINARILY ENJOINED from enforcing registration, verification, school zone, and fee violations of SORA that occurred or may occur from February 14, 2020, until the current crisis has ended, and thereafter until registrants are notified of what duties they have under SORA going forward.1 This interim injunctive relief conforms with and implements this court’s order that registrants cannot be held strictly liable for SORA violations.
          IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Interim Injunction takes effect IMMEDIATELY and applies to the primary class.
          IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that during this interim period the parties will CONTINUE to prepare the form of a Final Judgment, notices, and a plan of when and how the notices will be served. Counsel are expected to be prepared to submit the jointly-proposed Final Judgment not later than 14 days after the current crisis ends. Pursuant to the court’s opinion and order of February 14, 2020, the Final Judgment shall take effect 60 days after the date it is entered.
          IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within seven days of the entry of this order: (a) The MSP and Plaintiffs’ counsel shall POST notice of this order, and a copy
          1 This interim injunction enjoins only enforcement. It does not bar the defendants from maintaining the registry, such as inputting information about new registrants or continuing the Public Sex Offender Registry.
          (b) Whereas counsel for Defendants have identified the Prosecuting Attorneys Coordinating Counsel (PACC) as a suitable state agency for effective communication to individual Prosecuting Attorneys’ offices, the Executive Director of PACC is DIRECTED FORTHWITH to provide effective notice of this order, and a copy of it or link to it, by email to all Michigan Prosecuting Attorneys;
          (c) The MSP SOR Unit shall PROVIDE effective notice of this order, and a copy of it or link to it, by email to the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police and to the Michigan Sheriffs’ Association, who are expected to transmit the notice to all law enforcement personnel within those agencies who are responsible for SORA enforcement matters.
          Finally, IT IS ORDERED that parties REPORT to the court by joint memorandum or telephone conference, at their option, every 30 days on their progress in completing the tasks set out above and in the Court’s February 14, 2020, Opinion and Order, and any other matters pertinent to moving this case forward as expeditiously as reasonably possible in light of the current crisis.

        • G4Change

          @ BM: Thank you for posting this!!!!!

          I love this part:

          “…WHEREAS the parties report that although remedial legislation has been proposed,…”

          Um, it’s more like BULLSHIT legislation has been proposed!!!!

          This is awesome for the time being. The judge could have just “kicked the can down the street”, but instead there’s an injunction.

          It’s. About. Time.

  8. Nick

    @ Tim…first let me say that I appreciate all that the ACLU and The Oliver Group has done for the past years.
    In regards to your post, I do not understand what my age, the age of the victim and circumstances of the crime has to do with portions of the registry being unconstitutional. Those facts were used in determining sentencing…29 years ago. Why does it feel like we are on trial? Our debt was paid in full many years ago.

    • Josh

      @Nick….you’re so right! The thing I would want to know is why can’t we retry our case? I would want to look the politicians in the face and ask them why I was placed on a registry that didn’t exist because my probation was summarily amended with no due process? I don’t need to be coached by the ACLU or anybody else on how to talk to politicians. The reason why they want to know all the grimey details is so they can present the people with the least offensive set of circumstances to the legislature like they did with the Does in both lawsuits. Never mind that EVERYBODY who has been convicted before 2011 has been constitutionally VIOLATED!

      • Josh

        @all Michigan….did anybody catch the part of that order where it stated that MSP was not capable of determining who belonged to what class or subclass? I’m no computer whiz or hacker but wouldn’t that registry program have algorithms? Seems to me like some tech guy could have it all sorted out in a couple of hours. It is basically just data entry I would think….it also seems to me that if the MSP SOR unit people are working from home and they have the same amount of time on their hands that we all do, then why hasn’t anything gotten done? 17 days of delays wasn’t enough? I’m not complaining about this outcome not even a little bit and it warms my heart to watch the state get spanked again..praying it will continue when we get done with the COVID crisis….

        • BM

          @Josh

          Not quite sure it’s that simple to determine if they don’t have the offense date in the system vs conviction date. I called years ago to inquire why my conviction and not offense date was online.. was told they didn’t show in system.

          Secondly, did anyone catch this in order.. ?? INJUNCTION till “AND thereafter until registrants are notified of what duties they have under SORA going forward.” So this is a temp order and temp injunction until and unless we get some notification from MSP. So this injunction could last longer than Covid ordeal.

          What I am reading in the MSP letter, judges order is the date of the offense is what matters. This IMO is a very big deal for a lot of us.

        • Disgusted in Michigan

          Kind of funny how they say they cannot determine that, yet they sure did determine back in 2011 who to extend registration from 25 years to life. In my opinion, everyone who has a conviction date prior to the 2011 cut off date should be removed now, and those who’s offense dates are in question can be determined thereafter.

  9. Guy

    So does this order mean if I want to go run the track at the high school in my town I’m able to for the time being?

    • BM

      @Guy

      This is an injunction. They cannot enforce anything per originally dated 2/13 order. Effectively this is the same as would have happened then if there was no haggling on final judgement and 60 days elapsed.

      Go run.

    • Josh

      @Disgusted….that was the point I was trying to get at in my last comment…I go in and report my new license plate and it updates instantly online but these people “can’t” or “don’t” have the capability to remove data from a database. I don’t buy that at all…..personally speaking I just want OFF or if not off then not publicly displayed….
      The 2nd part I don’t get about the ruling is why LE can still “use” the registry….How are they going to “use” the registry? If I were to get pulled over driving a vehicle that is not one of my vehicles listed to me on the SOR….what are they going to do to me? If there’s no enforcement then take the damn thing offline…

      • BM

        @Josh,

        I’m not sure if they can’t or won’t or whatever with their computer remotely.. If that is all, I’m pretty sure they could do it. But I believe the issue is the actual offense date and deciphering that data. If they were to go off of conviction data, that is all online.. And yes, most of use were even convicted prior to 2011 and 2006 and could easily come off. So why not start there??? I agree, I’m just trying to figure out what excuse they could be using.

        I too want off completely!! I’d settle for being on the private though with some mail in form once a year. Everyone agrees it is the online portion that really affects our ability to move forward.

  10. TnT

    BOUT TIME ! Lets hope this is the beginning of the END ! Thank God, I think Judge Cleland sees threw Michigans B.S !

  11. Bobby S.

    @ any Michigander

    So does this finally mean what I think it means, and that is finally coming to an end, and after covid-19 is finally lifted and things start to get back to normal, ALL pre-2011 registrants will finally be removed and no longer have to register anymore. I hope I read that correctly and this is finally coming to an end. I downloaded the order to my computer so I will read it again, but does it actually mean this is finally coming to an end soon.

  12. Nick

    @ BM and all of my Michigan brothers. I think it means what you think it means Bobby S!!! Sure it says “temp” but what counts is the “null and void” for pre 2011 rc’s after the virus storm is over in Michigan. I think this it ir…holy crap!!!
    BM…thanks very much for sharing this.

    • Josh

      @Nick….”null” & “void” is good for us in terms of the current law…. but rest assured there will always be some legislation introduced by some politician down the road trying round us all up again…whether it’s some lame ass attempt like HB 5679 or something else….it will happen eventually. Even if or when this becomes a reality and we’re removed, it won’t erase the stigma of 25+ years of public perception. People will never see us as anything else and the next battle will be just beginning for some of us to alter the digital footprint we were forced to leave on the internet….I know some people like @Will Allen claim not give a rats ass what people think them…. but most people do want to be well thought of beyond family & close friends. Reputation does matter!

      • Will Allen

        Congratulations to all of you who are getting some relief, however temporary or not it might be.

        But let none of us forget that Registries shouldn’t exist at all. They are not acceptable for people who commit a crime today. And if Registries were acceptable, the Registry Supporters/Terrorists have absolutely zero excuses for why they failed to create a national, public, lifetime Gun Offender Registry decades ago. That alone is complete proof that none of this is really about public safety, protecting children, or the rest of their incessant lies.

        Regarding this “what people think about People Forced to Register” crap, I’ll just say that I can’t think of anything else in my life that was so liberating, mind-expanding, productive, and peaceable as it was when I was able to truly stop caring what insignificant people think. I feel I can’t tell you how nice it is, you have to live it. And you should certainly try. Registries did at least a couple of good things for me and that is one of them.

        My reputation only matters with respect to people who matter. Most people don’t. It’s that simple. RS/Ts don’t matter and I can’t have the first care or concern about their “opinions” or concerns. Just thinking about it makes me laugh. As if I should give a f*ck what some random, know-nothing 30 year old child thinks. The only reason to care is because such “people” are part of a mob that has to be neutralized.

        • Love, peace, and happiness

          @ Will: You have previously rejected meeting with me (previously RM on here but changed names as another RM appeared). I don’t care of your past, you financial situation, etc. It seems you want to fight, so do I.

        • Will Allen

          @Love, peace, and happiness:

          Ah, you are the old “R M”! Interesting to know.

          Yeah, Will Allen doesn’t meet people. I’ve thought many times recently about retiring Will Allen. I’ll just assume a different name. In reality, the easiest course for my life would be to retire Will and just ignore the Registries completely. I am busier now than I’ve ever been and I could use the time to do productive things. I might do that for a while.

          But I do advocate as my real self quite often. And I’ve met a lot of people in real life. I do work with the People Forced to Register who live near me. I help them. I hire them. Etc., etc. So I might meet you one day just in normal course. I am extremely busy right now though. I do pick and choose how I want to be busy though, so I have complete choice (mostly) about how I want to spend my time.

          Does it only “seem” that I want to fight? And not that I have been fighting for decades? If that’s the case, I haven’t been clear. A law enforcement criminal could walk into my home in the next 5 minutes and shoot me dead and I will still have done more damage and harm to them than they have to me or my family. I completely beat them in the first few years I was fighting them. I had to, for my own sanity and self-esteem. I caused more damage to them long ago than they could ever overcome. Today, I’m just piling on. It’s not much of a fight really, they are at an extreme disadvantage. They are fighting a virtually invisible enemy. All they can do to me is have a worthless list. I can do just about anything.

          Keep up the good fight.

  13. Saddles

    Excuse me if I am dumb but whats a Sora some third party. Seems we all make mistakes. Sure Josh made a great comment about his wife sticking by him as some of you have on here have made. Thats always good having someone stand with you thru thick and thin. Yes we all have helpers to help us along the way but courts don’t seem to see their mistakes and their pitfalls. Sure I am upset about my ordeal and I’m sure many are are just as upset on here as well. Josh you have something their about going back to court and making things right or what is punitive?
    This convid-19, Is it for a reason or a warning, is it for good or bad, well yes its bad. Even government don’t even know what it is and are spending thousands of dollars to try and find out the answer and yet people suffer whether single or with their spouse or family members. I hope everybody on here shouts out loud for true justice after all this ordeal settles down. Nobody likes to see lives lost even with this virus epic ordeal todayand all the suffering that goes with this type of pandermic. We all still need to pray.
    Yes Janice and her team will be in for a battle out in CA and area’s around. One wonders whos reason plays in this registry justice or is any type of ethics lost today in government. No wonder this judge in Maryland called a lot of this registry a punishment like calling a spade a spade. So whats punitive than some abc’s of not understanding for letter words and how meanings can go amiss or how they are used. All this registry can boggle the mind at times.

  14. Joe

    Does anyone know during all of this stuff if the MSP are supposed to remove the pre-2011 registrants from the registry or are they leaving everyone on the registry for now until a final decision is made?

    If they are supposed to suspend pre-2011 registrants from the registry and you are a pre-2011 registrant and still on the registry, what actions should be taken to be taken off or suspended during this time?

    I look forward to hearing back from anyone that has information about this.

    Thank You,

    Joe

  15. Saddles

    @Joe I don’t know anything about this ordeal but in many ways you and many guys on here are being railroaded and someone needs to take a stand

  16. brant

    Any updated info? When i wemt to msp on april 2 the sgt stated same as many others pre2011 not registering and will recie e letter moving forward after pandemic in regards to my
    responsibility moving forward if in fact i have any at that point….. i read everyones come ts and recieved alot info fro. Tim as well

  17. Bobby S.

    Hello All,

    I emailed MSP today, just to see what they say about removing people from the registry and so on an
    d asked how long it’s going to take and why they haven’t started removing people since the government is slowly starting to remove covid 19 restrictions, and here is what they emailed me back, i know it’s not bid news ,but it’s some news/update.

    The court decision has not yet gone into effect. Shortly after the COVID19 state of emergency is lifted one of two things will happen, we receive further direction from the court or new legislation will be implemented. Upon the implementation of one of those, we will send correspondence out to everyone on the registry as to how that will their duty to register and/or requirements

  18. Brant

    Yeah bobby s thanks for update that gov of ours trying to take it another 28 days into june so we sit and wait at this point

  19. Dennis

    I don’t understand why the legislatue is not working on this NOW.

    They’ve been able to meet and have sessions to pass a bill to stop the Governor’s stay at home order, so why not this bill??

    • Josh

      Relax y’all….the legislature has been shut down just like most of the state. There has been zero movement on HB 5679….Whitmer made a unilateral decision to extend the state of emergency without the legislature’s approval and she’s going to have to defend that in court apparently. Even if this does stretch out until May 28 we’ll have a better idea of the timeline. According to the Cleland temporary order the state has 7 day after the emergency expires to get the FINAL order of judgement entered and the 60 day clock starts ticking. I’m becoming more convinced by the day that WE will not be any kind of priority for the legislature coming off this crisis. Just my opinion…

      • BM

        @Josh –

        Couldn’t agree more. I don’t think we’ll be the main attraction once we get out of the “emergency” declaration. In fact even if she does lift it, we will still be in a world of sh*t. The money is drying up, jobs are gone, businesses are closing. I’m watching the money and the deficit. If it costs millions of unnecessary money to run this scam and the court has declared it already unconstitutional, it might provide even another layer of cover for these political yahoos.

  20. Bobby S.

    Well, it looks like we are going to have to wait even longer now, since Whitmer signed another emergency executive order until May 28th, this is really starting to get ridiculous and blown out of proportion. This needs to end now. The Judge needs to order the removal of all pre-2011 registrants immediately. Have they had their 30 confidence check in yet?, does any one know, if the judge doesn’t act soon and order the removal soon, this crap is going to drag into next year. Just my opinion of course.

  21. BM

    EVERYONE – HB 5679 is on the committee agenda next week!

    DATE: Wednesday, May 6, 2020
    TIME: 10:00 AM
    PLACE:
    Room 519, House Office Building,
    Lansing, MI

    AGENDA:
    HB 5679 (Rep. Lower) Criminal procedure; sex offender registration; sex offender registration act; modify.

    • David

      ⭐⭐ Get Active NOW!! ⭐⭐

      Read the proposed Bill! Then call, email, send FAXes to your State representatives about this Bill!! Do it now!! Make your voice heard NOW while you can!! 👍👍👍

      Do not stop fighting the Registry until it is absolutely, completely dead, cremated to ash, sealed in a lead-lined urn and buried in cement for the remainder of all eternity! 👍👍👍

    • Nicholas Dean

      What does this bill mean? More so what does it mean for a person who’s offense was in 2001? Does it mean that if it passes nothing is going to change?

  22. TnT

    They are Dirty ! Sent out 20 letters everyone should do the same ! Aclu sent this everyone needs to call everyday email ,

    Good Afternoon Everyone,

    The House Judiciary Committee has put HB5679 on the agenda for May 6, 2020 at 10am. This is incredibly dangerous, as the public health risk of COVID-19 makes it dangerous for the public to meaningfully participate in this hearing. We are working with the committee chair to remove this dangerous legislation from the committee hearing, and are asking for your help in contacting legislators who sit on the judiciary committee.

    In the event that this does not get postponed, we would love to be able to have you all submit written testimony. If you are interested in doing so, but have never written testimony, we are here to help. Attached is a How to Talk to your Legislator Guide, which may be helpful in writing your testimony.

    We will keep you all posted as soon as we hear anything.

    Please email and call the following House Judiciary members and leadership office daily (if possible) to demand that they remove from the House Judiciary Committee hearing on May 6, 2020 at 10:00 am in Lansing, HB 5679.

    NAME
    EMAIL
    PHONE
    Melissa Sweet
    msweet@house.mi.gov
    517-373-5176

    Speaker Lee Chatfield
    LeeChatfield@house.mi.gov
    5173732629

    Chairperson Graham Filler
    GrahamFiller@house.mi.gov
    5173731778

    Rep. Beau LaFave
    BeauLaFave@house.mi.gov
    5173730156

    Rep. Diana Farrington
    Dianafarrington@house.mi.gov
    5173737768

    Rep. Gary Howell
    GaryHowell@house.mi.gov
    5173731800

    Rep. Steven Johnson
    StevenJohnson@house.mi.gov
    5173730840

    Rep. Daire Rendon
    DaireRendon@house.mi.gov
    5173733817

    Rep. Ryan Berman
    RyanBerman@house.mi.gov
    5173731799

    Rep. Douglas Wozniak
    DouglasWozniak@house.mi.gov
    5173730843

    Re. David LaGrand
    DavidLaGrand@house.mi.gov
    5173732668

    Rep. Vanessa Guerra
    VanessaGuerra@house.mi.gov
    5173730152

    Rep. Brian Elder
    BrianElder@house.mi.gov
    5173730158

    Rep. Tenisha Yancey
    Tenishayancey@house.mi.gov
    5173730154

    Rep. Kyra Bolden
    KyraBolden@house.mi.gov
    5173731788

    Dear Representative,

    HB 5679 has been scheduled for a hearing on May 6. It is egregious that our elected officials would schedule a public hearing for a bill that has a profound impact on tens of thousands of Michigan citizens during a serous pandemic. The health, safety, and welfare of your constituents should be paramount and traveling to a public meeting during this crisis is unsafe. There is no way for the public, for those impacted by this law, can meaningfully participate in this hearing and I am requesting that you postpone this hearing until such a time when it is safe and wise for public participation.

    Several provisions of the Michigan Sex Offender Registry were found unconstitutional over four years ago, necessitating substantially amending the law. Lawyers and advocates have been working with the legislature since 2016 propose a fair and just alternative and there were many areas where we had agreement. HB 5679 incorporates none of those agreed-upon provisions and is inadequate at curing the constitutional flaws in Michigan’s Sex Offender Registry Act.

    Please postpone any hearings on HB 5679 until such a time when the public can meaningfully participate.

    If you do not want to write them copy and paste this letter, & send with Name or Even Concerned Michigan Voter !

    • Mike Donovan

      Thank you for the heads up on this maliciously timed action by the Michigan state legislature. Is it possible to attend this meeting in person, or would access be restricted due to the global pandemic?

  23. Nicholas Dean

    What does this bill mean? More so what does it mean for a person who’s offense was in 2001? Does it mean that if it passes nothing is going to change?  Okay so just got an email explaining it in the simple terms. Yeah from the sounds of it they are going to screw us again. I mean why wouldn’t they push this through and put it all in the rear view mirror. This blows.

    • Josh

      @All….I had to open my mouth yesterday and mention that nothing was going on with 5679 and now this….should have known better that they’d try and backdoor this bull$h!t when they thought nobody would be paying attention….Typical politicians focusing on something like this in the middle of a pandemic…..

      • Mike Donovan

        Josh,

        This does not surprise me at all; they are going to take advantage of any weakness that they can find. Most of those in power in Michigan seem to have no morals or compassion (at least Dana Nessel is a real human). I am wondering if appearing in person in Lansing may help our cause (assuming that it is allowed due to the pandemic)?

    • Bobby Smela

      Well, i sent my response concerning H.B. 5759. So far i got two responses back, but they were just auto responses so far. The one thing i don’t get and maybe its just because i don’t understand how this stuff works is how is H.B.5759 going to effect pre-2011 people if at all since they have to start removing us from the registry once this Covid 19. Crap is over with

      • Josh

        @BobbyS…..I’m gonna say this again…WHO ever said that they HAVE to or ARE going to remove pre-2011 registrants? NOBODY has said that! There is a possibility and it’s just that, a possibility that if the legislature can’t get something done then the registry will be no longer be able to be enforced against some of us….I see you asking the same thing on at least 3 different forums looking for somebody who will tell you exactly what you want to hear…..things are as uncertain now in our regard as they have ever been. Best case for us is failure to get something passed by the legislature PERIOD……

  24. Nick

    Ok…so I got the email from Tum at ACLU tonight. I am at a loss for word to describe the lawmakes in Michigan. Talk about pulling a fast one.No question that this is a group effort to get it through while everyone is in lockdown.
    So the billcomes up next Wednesday and what happens then? If it passes the house does the Gob have to sign off on it or can she veto I the bill? Can Judge Clelend intercede?
    So the ACLU wants us to go after the named reps in the email and ask for a postponement of the bill. I just simply don’t understand how they can present a bill that doesn’t address the unconstitutional sections of the old sora. Are they all actually that crooked? At first I assumed that the dude from Ionia was acting on his own….how dumb was I? Was the last 4 years really a waste of time and they’re going to have it their was in the end anyway?

    • Josh

      @Nick…I think you hit on something important. I also assumed that the douche from Greenville/Ionia that introduced this bill was acting on his own but it’s now crystal clear what the state’s strategy is….we all know this bill is nowhere close to what it’s supposed to be….I believe they intend to ram this bill through and force the ACLU to have to re-litigate from the beginning again keeping us in limbo indefinitely……they saw a golden opportunity and they jumped all over it……unfortunately, the judge is not a legislator and I’m not sure what he can do to prevent this if it gets that far….if history is any indicator when it comes to this topic when it comes to a vote that this will pass unanimously. No politician can afford to be on the “wrong” side of this issue…..pretty frustrating really. I was hoping not have to use my attorney but I guess we’ll see…..

    • Nickthe1st

      I saw that there is another Nick from MI that joined the group so I thought I’d change my handle to lessen the confusion. I’ll go with Nichthe1st from now on.

      Sp on todays email from Tim from aclu there was a highlighted version of the new proposed bill. No question that the putz from Greenville/Ionia was not acting alone, and this only muddies the water on the originalmess.
      I think that Midnight Mike had it right the other day…there are many steps this thing has to go through and hopefully somewhere along the line this thing will be sent to the round file.
      Of nothing else, this is just another indicator that they can’t be trusted to do the right thing. Snakes.

  25. TnT

    Wonder if contacting the news would help? Should we ALL be in LANSING this Wednesday? If so we ALL should do our best to be there, before they push it threw on us and we Regret not going ??????? Can anyone answer this ?

    • Josh

      @TnT…..we’ll get ZERO support from the media, so I wouldn’t waste the time. Unless all 44,000 of us were to show up at the capital building then I don’t think a protest would do much either…

  26. Thomas

    Guys, let me just say this….

    It may or may not be something you want to hear….but, if this person didn’t start this bill, honestly, it probably would have dragged on for a couple years. Yes, its bad!….BUT, at least he STARTED IT! .

    NOW….this is OUR TIME to give input and try to help make a better bill! I agree with the ACLU and caution…please….. do NOT GIVE THEM YOUR STORY!.. They DON’T (and many of us either) CARE!

    No matter who’s fault it was, YOU took the plea. So TRASH the “Story Telling”.

    Next:

    Write your legislatures on how it has AFFECTED you!. You may think they don’t give a damn, but MANY of them do. Some of them have ALWAYS cared. Even AG Bill Schuette agreed there should be many changes.

    This leads me to my next point:
    IT’S POLITICAL FOLKS!! Don’t take it personal, but STAND UP NOW!
    NOW is the time AND ONLY TIME!!!

    Think about it!
    All the legislatures are at home now, and will be for the next month, IF not longer. No job, no distraction, NOTHING! If there was not any other time, THIS IS NOW THE TIME TO EDUCATE THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?!?!?!?!?!?!?

    Yes, many of us have gone thru HORRIFIC times!….. But let your legislatures know how its effecting you!

    PLEASE: FOLLOW THE GUIDE AND TEMPLATE FROM THE ACLU!!!!!!!!!!

    If you don’t, YOU WILL SCREW US ALL, FOREVER!!!!

    Common guys!!!!! Let’s do this!!!

    • Blake

      How is this bill constitutional? It does nothing address the ex post facto. Especially the pre 2006 ex post facto. So they intend to have basically 2 different registries? That doesnt even make sense. Can anyone explain yo me how the judge is gonna let this fly especially since he agreed to put the order on hold and then Michigan does this? I don’t think the judge is gonna like being lied to.

  27. Edson

    @ ALL …..After all these years of waiting ….WOW….Kind of figured the state would find a way too pull a fast one over. Its mostly because the Aclu gave them WAY too much time too figure something out , All the negotiations after a WIN??? Now has turned into a total loss. 🙁

    If this bill passes its the Aclu too Blame . So Painful !

    • BM

      What really sucks…. the last regime we were so close to a better bill and probably one that most of us could live with. Sounds like it would’ve been FAR better than this crap. ACLU pushed for more and rolled the dice. Backfire. Now we’re at this point and it’s frustrating for all. I plan to go to Lansing Wednesday if it holds up.

      • Josh

        @Michigan…..after sleeping on it and giving it some more thought…I think we all need to calm down a bit. Are the people from the state a bunch of dirty B!t@hes? Yes, but we all knew that and they just proved it yet again. BUT, nothing has been settled yet. We all know the proposed law sucks bad and isn’t what any of us were hoping for. That being said there’s 3-4 more steps and the governor’s signature that would still need to happen before this would become law. There’s plenty of time to fight this….we all got the email so let’s go to work and make use of the contact info and stand up for ourselves! Hopefully, the ACLU will grow a pair and stop playing nice for once. For those of you who believe as I do then now would be a good time to pray as well. This fight still isn’t over and none of us expected the state to Just go away quietly…..hang in there brothers & sisters!

      • Sheldon

        @Thomas you think the legislature’s give two f#%ks about us these a holes are the ones that came up with the registry. We will never get off because this country is at its end . GOVERNMENT TAKE OVER. I don’t need to plea to them I did my punishment. F#$k them they labeled me , so I labelel them and dub them unforgiving.

  28. MidnightMike

    Actually I wouldn’t freak out to much guys. The first place a bill goes is to judicial committee. They look at the content of the bill to see if it’s legal as written or needs a few tweaks before it goes to the full house/senate for consideration. I don’t think I have to say much more. You guys know that’s gonna take them some time and I’m sure they will have the same WTF reaction that we are given judge C’s ruling. It’s not like it will be passed exactly worded the same as it was submitted,,,, and it’s not like it’s gonna happen in 30 days. Write letters, talk to people and tell them what you think of course it can’t hurt,,,, but when the judicial committee (Lawyers that see if it’s even legal) read AG nessle’s brief and the judges ruling;,,, this could result in a new law but I would expect it to be way way more complex,,, and if it’s not finished and passed soon,,, it will be booted for this year the way Wyatt’s law has been for years. I really see zero percent chance of this going anywhere besides campaign emails. Stay safe and prayed up Michigan!!!! Have patience.

  29. Nick

    So reading the emails I just got, I have real trouble understanding the bills and the way they are written but what I got from it is that pre 2011 convictions will return to essentially what we agreed to when we were convicted. No tier system, no work and living zone exclusions and no more having to report everytime I buy a car or whatever. Am I wrong? Someone with more understanding please explain. Thanks

    • mike

      you are basically correct as to what the current bill states. However, it is very important to note that this is just a bill that is going into the first committee. It could die in committee, or have many amendments to it. Then once out of committee, many more steps involved that will likely see more changes. It took the State years to get this far, this is not a process that will be over in a few days.

      • David

        @ Mike: “this is not a process that will be over in a few days.” Very true, Mike. But now is the time to act, people. Folks need to make calls, send emails and FAXes, letter, etc. Flood the legislature with comments from yourself, family and friends. In Cali, we do all that AND we show up to those Committee Meetings en force to get our message across loud and clear…..AND IT WORKS!! Please make your voices heard!

  30. Brant

    After watching the hearing i was like wow the first 3 people to speak were to winded in circles and more confusing then the law i agree its a bogue law period and i take from it this itll get dragged out and hopefully all the post 06 and 11 bs will not fly thats what id like to see but furthermore the pre 2011 should not get dragfed through the mud in limbo waiting as well all the 06 and 11 modifications are garbage and retroactiviely resentencing someone is too i did not really see any just dilligence by aclu to adress antrhing of merit other thsn we dont like this bill postphone the bill etc. Enough is enough rights are being violated everyday u postpone this bill real si ple cleleand said it was unconstitutional end of story address michigan for continui g to violate out rights period do t say take all the effn time u want were in. No hurry approach as was stated by the same people suppose to be helping us im blown away period seems to me theres alot of alterior motives on both sides what who knows but even the msp said this sora was bs but no no lets wait take another year or two and see if we can drag it out untill we can meet again for what our rights are trampeled on every effn day enough

    • Nickthe1st

      Does anyone know if there is a viewable copy of the bideo from this mornings meeting in Lansing?

        • Josh

          @Michigan…I just took the time to watch the hearing today and in my opinion it couldn’t have gone much better. Other then 1 letter from MSP stating support for the bill every other piece of testimony/data was overwhelmingly AGAINST it. My hat is off to the people who testified and I thank the experts & lawyers who got to convey some of the REAL facts and scientific data that support our arguments….the most encouraging sign came at the end from Rep. LaGrand of Grand Rapids who basically said that this bill comes up short. It also appears that there will be more discussion and this bill isn’t just going to be shoved through as is…again my opinion.

        • MLinCA

          I watched it as well.
          It was encouraging to hear the well thought out and professional presentation by the one’s who oppose registries.

  31. Nickthe1st

    @Brandon you posted a link earlier to the video of the meeting in Lansing this morning. I couldn’t get the link to work…went to a Mi House page and it was blank. Anyone else have this problem or someplace else where I can watch the bideo?

    • Brandon L

      It still works for me. If you look in the archived videos it is in there. Just look for Judiciary for 5/6.

  32. Tim in WI

    Brandon,
    Thank you for the link. I found it informative. I had a hard time listening to Levinson. She has a tendency to run on too long in her advocacy. The Law professor put Kennedy’s position in Smith v DOE Alaska in naked light. I try to not getting angry about these elites cherry picking when and where they uphold basic constitutional concepts, but they too often get away with it.

    • Charlie

      Hey everyone, I was confident reading the amenmendments to the bill before the legislative hearing that the very few changes were not going to fly or be a suitable change to this big problem. I enjoy reading and still after changes I had to reread several lines like wait…..what. Any lawyer worth their salt could tare it up in court still for vagueness. Look at the description of “school property” and tell me you can be within 999 feet of anything owned by a school or given to students as an instrument for learning! Technically speaking a technicality could mean school book, pencil, pen, basketball, lap top, ruler, homework.
      I hope someone isn’t going to have nightmares of a school basket ball rolling towards them downhill as they try to get away from it. And 1. BS we are not able to watch basketball this year!!!! The playoffs are about to begin lol
      I also want to know where we can buy a thousand foot tape measure!!??

      • Kristen

        @Charlie

        I actually learned out to pin drop and measure distance using Google maps yesterday. My husband and I moved into a home almost three years ago that says we’re 0.6 mile from a school if you run directions on MapQuest or Google maps, but the city police tried to violate him about a year ago saying we lived within a school zone, which was news to us. MSP said nothing when he first registered after we moved nor the additional 5 times after. When I did the pin drop from our closet property line to the closest school property (which isn’t even a school, it’s their unused football field) we do fall less than 1000 as a bird flies.

        The real question though is how does 1000 feet keep someone safe? Or 500? Or how do you come up with that figure and have data to support it? How does 1001 feet away now make it ok? Pure silliness if you ask me.

        Hopeful for change! Hopeful that all those who have been repressed from these changes finally become free!

        • Charlie

          @Kristen, that has to be frustrating! I’m sure nobody knows all the property and pieces owned by schools or if they buy up more land and become closer even

    • BM

      @Everyone,

      I also found it encouraging that the reps repeated that this was not something that needed to be rushed or was in a panic to get done.

  33. Love, peace, and happiness

    “The real question though is how does 1000 feet keep someone safe? Or 500? Or how do you come up with that figure and have data to support it? How does 1001 feet away now make it ok?”

    It doesn’t. Living somewhere does not prevent a person from committing a crime.

    There is no data to support that a person will commit a crime within any certain distance of a school, etc. 95+% of those committing a sex crime have NO criminal history. 90% plus are by people close to their victim.

    It’s all emotion and politics… invoking undo fear into the public. We fight this daily.

    • Will Allen

      Yep. And the harassers/terrorists who think Registries are acceptable are just fine with shooters living right next door to schools. They are fine with shooters being in schools. And that is because these “residency restrictions” have jack shit to do with public safety, protecting children, or any of the rest of their lies. They are for harassment. That’s all.

      Because Registries are patent nonsense I promise I will continue to be around random children all the time. It’s trivial and normal to do.

  34. Nick d

    So why is the clock not still running on that 60 days? It would seem that are able to function enough to write and try to pass bills and new laws so why is the 60 day limit not still in place? Garbage

  35. Saddles

    Talk about the land of the free and the home of the brave. Every state seems like it has its own laws to induce on its people in a consutitional way. As I mentioned to all on here I’m on 10 yrs. probation and live right across the street from kids even in back are families with kids One wonders were two wrongs make a right today? This Sora thing which I don’t understand is man-made laws that appear to have some merit but are as vain as many of these registry ordeals.

    Talk about Government’s overriding on others or giving a cold sholder to true justice. Justice delayed is justice denied. One wonders who is being fair to many with many in these unjust laws and ways. A family unit is a family unit.

  36. Nicjthe1st

    Good point Nick D. If the committee is meeting regarding the new bill why hasn’t the 60 day clock started??? I received an email from Tim @ aclu today informing everyone that the committee will meet again on the 15th of May and the new sora bill is on the agenda. Sure looks likes they’re trying to push it along. If I heard it right on the video they said that the MSP sent a letter stating they would like for the school restriction be dropped. At the end of the video one of the rep’s did a pretty good job explaining why this is a bad bill. I just can’t see how they could pass a piece of crap like this.
    I’m wondering what the opinions are of anyone in this group who watched the video?

  37. TnT

    Been writing the sate reps all week and having friends and family do the same, NOW IS THE TIME !! We all need to keep writing them and expressing the DAMAGE the registries do to not only those on them but the families that suffer as well. The registries have NEVER stopped any crime , nor has it protected ANYONE from anyone on them. Its time too put a END to these unjust , unconstitutional laws that do nothing but hold a person who has served their time DOWN for in most cases a life time of PUNISHMENT!

    • Kristen

      @TnT
      I also have been writing all week and plan to continue to do so. I’m finding it difficult now in changing up my letters to argue different points, I find myself coming back to the same arguments. I suppose that’s ok, but I’d like to ensure each letter is a new attempt to grab someone’s attention to help the cause.

      Are you writing totally different letters each time you send? Or have you strategically been sending the same few at different times?

      I just really want to make sure I’m fighting this on all cylinders for all registrants.

  38. TnT

    @Kristen … I have sent 2 letters too each myself then have helped family members send their own and friends as well , Yes the more the better I maybe will even write another tomorrow or Monday I just want them too understand that its not fair or is it just to hold people down their entire lives with this kinda punishment its not constitutional nor is it human its NOT EXCEPTABLE too treat people like this after a conviction has been served . It only holds people down from ever being NORMAL or EQUAL . They need too know the pain these registries have inflicted on people on them and their families, Yet the registry has NEVER prevented any crime or Stopped anyone from offending.

  39. John

    Anyone that is on lifetime GPS In michigan? I was looking too pay my bill, it seams it went from $30.00 per month too $60.00 starting in March.
    I never received any notification on this has anyone else?
    I am so upset right now this is punishment.

  40. Nick

    @ John…A close friend of mine is on a 5 year parole and is paying $520 per month ($13 oer day for gps tether). Finding a job and housing and then being saddled with that much is insane. They expect you to survive? Also…I heard that in some cases on the west side of the state they charge $18 for gps.

    • Jackson

      If Michigan is similar to Wisconsin, you have a “pay as you make” system. The more you make, the more you pay, and that can run into the 100s a month just for GPS fees. I don’t pay shit because I don’t work and I collect SSDI. But these gps people provide me the same quality of service as a paying customer. I’ve been through 2 ankle bands and 2 power cords, yet these folks still come out to the hood to provide me service and fix my issues. A couple times, I did have some scared monkeys come out here. Ha! Ha! But usually these gps tech geeks are cool and provide good service for free-in my case at least. Don’t think POs and DOC people will give you a break for working. They’ll just take more. Remember, those people don’t think like us-hard work should be rewarded and we should provide incentives to parolees who work. No, none of that shit. Instead, DOC people only think of the best ways to take advantage of your situation and rip you off.

  41. Nickthe1st

    Regarding Michigan House Bill 5679, has anyone who has written to the members of the committee received a reply? I don’t expect to but I’m just curious. I jknow nothing about it but I am surprised the bill was on the agenda so soon after last weeks meeting. I do think it wsa a good sign when one of the reps spoke out against the bill at the end of the metting.

    • Hopeful in MI

      I have received emails back from my local representative and from the committee chair Filler’s Staff.

    • Kristen

      Same, just received a few auto responses.
      I did however get a response from an aid, Graham Filler forwarded my email request offering written testimony and the staff confirmed that they received and had included my statement in last week’s packets.

      I still continue to write daily regardless, I’m sure they know me by name now and eye roll when they see more emails. I have also been writing Attorney General and the Governor because at some point it’s going to come back full circle and they’ll have their say.

      • Josh

        @Michigan…..Anybody hear anything about the judicial committee hearing this morning? I couldn’t watch it live due to work. Tim the intern sent out a email update within a hour after the last hearing a week ago…but nothing so far on this one?

  42. TnT

    @Nick ….. Like 100 emails that I know that went out… all replies were autoreplied … Go Figure !

  43. Brant

    Auto responses only

  44. Edson

    Yes watched it , You Didn’t miss much the republican’s just kept cutting off the experts who were rushed threw their testimony on the sorna issue , unlike the experts testifying on other cases before this one. They are WRONG they could careless, and very rude, it seems to me, They also do not seem to like the Aclu , they rush them threw and rudely just cut them off all the time. Sad but True.

  45. Nickthe1st

    @ Edson…I agree 1000%. The first group had all the time they wanted and when it was our turn the moderator said…”you have 32 minutes”. I think all the people who spoke did a super job and Paul, the attourney from ACLU did a tremendous presentation…and then was cut off py the moderator. That guy was super rude from the very beginning. Again, I was very impressed with Paul and will try to get the link to the copy of the video.
    I’lll say it again…if this bill makes it past this committee, remember who voted yes come election time. This bill doesn’t have a single leg to stand on and is total bs.

  46. Nickthe1st

    Below is the link to the video of Wednesdays Michigan House Bill 5679. There’s 4 or 5 presentations before 5679
    https://www.house.mi.gov/SharedVideo/PlayVideoArchive.html?video=JUDI-051320.mp4

  47. Bobby S.

    @Nickthe1st, Thank you for posting the link. Though it seemed short compared to the last meeting, it also seemed like some of the stories and comments were repeats, from the last meeting, or is it just me. Thanks again for posting the link.

    • Josh

      @Nick1…..the section of the hearing regarding 5679 was shorter then the previous week. I do have to disagree with Nick & Edson about the committee chair being rude. I thought he was direct and to the point. I also believe that they are on a scheduled agenda before they even begin which would explain the rush job. Last week 5679 took up the majority of the hearing….having watched yesterday’s hearing I think it went VERY well again! I just received a email update from Tim the intern with a attachment containing a letter from Dana Nessel. She lays out in no uncertain terms how aware SHE is about the bill’s shortcomings and how she does NOT support it in its current form….Once again, our state’s top law enforcement agent has come to our defense….INCREDIBLE! I usually prefer to take the pessimistic approach with my expectations but in light of what I just read, I see there being no path forward for this bill as currently written….you have the state’s top law enforcement official against this and the former prosecutor from Grand Rapids on the judicial committee having already said it’s NO GOOD…Outside, a lukewarm letter of support from MSP, I’m not aware of anybody else voicing support in favor….

      • Nickthe1st

        @ Josh. I believe that the committee chair said at the start that they had a hard close at 10:30..that someone else needed the room. Yes, he was direct and to the point and I understand that he had to watch the clock…he was doing his job. I also read the letter from the AG today and it leaves no doubt on where she stands. Now I wonder how long they will spend on rewriting 5679, or will they roll the dice as it is? I still want to hear what they intend to do with pre 2011, 2006, and even those of us that are pre 1994.

  48. TnT

    @gree with Nick1 … Like too know?? What they plan on doing with those of us who are pre even the registry like myself who were denied due prosses and just added too the registry after our convictions. Not fair at all too allow these Jack @sss to be able too even apply this registry too us at all. Yes the A.G letter was very interesting to say the least. I would love nothing more then to testify but the 3 minute rule is B.S. I would much rather tell my story too a grand jury who will listen and then actually hold them responsible for the damage they have caused with unconstitutional law and ability to retroactively apply it after a conviction and sentence by a judge, not a politician who couldn’t give two F%#s , this is why we are where we are today with this registry is no ones fault but the politicians who write and allow these entrapment laws that have most of us begging for our lives back in the first place .

    • Josh

      @Michigan…I’m also very curious to see what the judiciary committee comes up with. I almost want to see it sent through just to be vetoed by the governor which would hopefully kill the time on the 60 day clock which I believe has to begin on or around June 5. That is unless Big Gretch extends the emergency order again after May 28…On the other hand, MAYBE with all the pressure and resistance from everybody who has contributed testimony the legislature will comply with the intent of the courts ruling….I’m dubious of course about that…..Either way, Michigan’s legislative session is fast running out of time before summer vacation so I expect some kind of development very soon…

      • Dennis

        Do you think they will wait and take it up next session?

        • Josh

          @Dennis….I’m not sure how that would work but I don’t think it can wait until next session unless Whitmer extends the emergency order. That order is set to expire May 28th and the interim order from Judge Cleland said that the state had 7 days from the end of the emergency to get the final order of judgement entered and MSP can start sending those letters about our new responsibilities. 60 days should start counting down from that day….that would put the date around August 5th or thereabouts. You’d have to check this for yourself but I believe the legislature shuts itself down for the summer months with the exception of like one day a month…my point is that I would guess that something would happen sooner rather than later…..

      • BM

        @Josh

        I’m curious why the ACLU or anyone else involved in the previous negotiations have not produced or introduced an opposing bill that includes all the changes being talked about. Any thoughts? They said they were close and if they could find a sponsor, they would have an alternative option at least.

        • Josh

          @BM…..that’s a good question and one I have no idea how to answer. You’d think that there could or should be multiple competing bills? That’s a question for the ACLU….In my opinion, I would think it’d be very hard to get a legislator to put his/her name to a bill that softens the treatment of people convicted of sex offenses. Look at this tool who drafted 5679….Either this guy is tone deaf, completely unaware of current events, or he’s trying to make a name for himself as some sort of badass who’s tough on crime come next election cycle…..like I said in a earlier post, I believe a bill like 5679 would have sailed through the legislature 4 years ago without anybody batting a eyelash. But, because the state has played so many games and their first real “effort” as a legislative fix is a direct slap in the face to what Judge Cleland has ruled people are standing up for themselves now…

    • Austin

      @tnt do you have a link to the ag letter you mentioned?

  49. Bobby S

    Next Hearing at 8:30 Tuesday May 19 keep the testimony coming
    May 15 at 2:12 PM
    PrintRaw message

    Intern
    To: Intern
    Judiciary, Rep. Graham Filler, Chair

    Please contact the following: GrahamFiller@house.mi.gov if you wish to give testimony digitally. Furthermore, you can submit written testimony that will be available to all members of the committee and placed in the record by emailing the committee clerk at msweet@house.mi.gov.

    DATE: Tuesday, May 19, 2020
    TIME: 8:30 AM
    PLACE:
    Room 519, House Office Building,
    Lansing, MI
    AGENDA:

    HB 5679 (Rep. Lower) Criminal procedure; sex offender registration; sex offender registration act; modify.
    HB 5700 (Rep. Alexander) Medical marihuana; licenses; eligibility for medical marihuana license; modify.
    SB 70 (Sen. Johnson) Crime victims; other; address confidentiality program for certain victims and individuals; create.
    SB 71 (Sen. Barrett) Elections; voting procedures; provisions in the Michigan election law regarding individuals in the address confidentiality program; provide for.
    SB 72 (Sen. Johnson) Education; school districts; prohibition for certain schools from disclosing records to parents when disclosure is prohibited by a personal protection order; provide for.
    SB 73 (Sen. Chang) Traffic control; driver license; address confidentiality program for certain victims and individuals; allow for driver license to be issued with designated address.
    SB 74 (Sen. Geiss) Traffic control; driver license; address confidentiality program for certain victims and individuals; allow for enhanced driver license and enhanced official state personal identification cards to be issued with designated address.
    SB 75 (Sen. Theis) State; identification cards; address confidentiality program for certain victims and individuals; allow for state identification cards to be issued with designated address.
    SB 76 (Sen. LaSata) Courts; other; certain crime victims; exempt from jury duty and provide that certain individuals are not practicing law in violation of the revised judicature act.
    SB 420 (Sen. Lucido) Civil procedure; execution; service of execution; modify procedures.
    SB 899 (Sen. MacDonald) Health occupations; health professionals; immunity from civil or criminal liability during a declared emergency; provide for certain health care workers.
    Please see the House Committee Protocol pertaining to COVID-19:
    https://www.house.mi.gov/committee_protocol.asp
    OR ANY BUSINESS PROPERLY BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE

    To view text of legislation go to: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=CommitteeBillRecord

    Committee Clerk: Melissa Sweet
    Phone:

  50. TnT

    @ Austin here it is couldn’t get a link was sent to my email . I will copy n paste below.

    A.G Letter too Michigan House 5/14/2022

    The Honorable Graham Filler, Chair House Judiciary Committee 124 North Capitol Avenue Lansing, MI 48933

    House Bill 5679 Dear Chairman Filler and members of the Judiciary Committee: I appreciate the opportunity to weigh in on House Bill 5679 and the important issue of amending Michigan’s current Sex Offender Registry Act (SORA). The scope and contours of SORA are issues I care about deeply, for reasons I set forth in my amicus brief to the Michigan Supreme Court in the SORA cases pending in that court. For reasons that include community stability and public safety, I have particular concerns with SORA’s overall lack of individualized assessment of risk, its geographic exclusion zones, the tiers, and its onerous in-person reporting requirements. And given that the Sixth Circuit addressed these same points when it held that imposition of SORA on individuals who had committed offenses prior to July 1, 2011, was an Ex Post Facto Clause violation, Does #1-5 v Snyder, 834 F3d 696 (CA 6, 2016), it is vital that amendments to SORA fully address these concerns. I believe that HB 5679 has made some headway in doing so, and I appreciate the work that has gone into its drafting. But it is my opinion that the bill does not sufficiently address either my concerns or those of the federal court in these key areas and others. The bill needs considerably more work if the State is going to avoid future litigation over the constitutionality of its registry. And because courts tend to analyze the registry as a whole, any major area that remains insufficiently addressed could cause the entire Act to fall. For ease, I have organized my comments based on the specific provision, as follows:
    The Honorable Graham Filler, Chair Page 2 May 11, 2020
    Overall view The bill has further complicated, rather than simplified, SORA. One key way it has done so is by bifurcating the registry—essentially creating separate registries for pre-2011 and post-2011 registrants. And within those separate registries there are actually five different sets of rules, depending on the length of registration. This makes an already “byzantine code,” Does #1-5 v Snyder, 834 F3d 696, 697 (CA 6, 2016), even more difficult for registrants to understand and for law enforcement officials to enforce. This is likely to lead to increase rather than avoid litigation.
    Lack of individualized risk assessment The length of registration should be based on risk and should be supported by evidence and research on recidivism. (Nessel amicus at pp 29–40.) The current SORA uses the offense of conviction as the only factor in determining whether an individual has to register and, if so, the length of the registration. HB 5679 continues this shortsighted offense-based assessment, and for post-2011 registrants who are still subject to tier designations, their assigned tier is tied to the offense(s) rather than to degree of risk. The Sixth Circuit criticized our SORA on this very point, noting that it “ascribes and publishes tier classifications corresponding to the state’s estimation of present dangerousness without providing for any individualized assessment.” Does #1-5, 834 F3d at 703 (emphasis added). And problematically, HB 5679 suffers from the same weakness as the current SORA in that it affords a registrant no path to get off the registry. There is no ability to petition for removal based on an individualized assessment of risk or the passage of a specified number of years with no new sex offense. HB 5679’s offense-only approach does not adequately address public safety or federal court concerns. Unless this approach is re-evaluated, I believe the State will continue to be vulnerable to litigation. Other states have utilized various models, and some existing tools—such as Static-99 and Parole Board evaluation—could potentially be utilized in this endeavor.
    Geographic exclusion zones The bill retains school geographic exclusion zones (Sec 33(e); Sec 34(1)(a),(b)). This will be problematic given that the existence of geographic exclusion zones was a key focus of the Sixth Circuit in holding that SORA was unconstitutional Ex Post Facto punishment. The Sixth Circuit said that these zones pose “a great difficulty in finding a place where [registrants] may live or work” and “put significant restraints on how registrants may live their lives.” Does #1-5, 834 F3d at 702, 703. And the Court noted that there was “scant” evidence that these zones actually keep
    The Honorable Graham Filler, Chair Page 3 May 11, 2020
    the public safe. Id. at 704–705. I argued those same points to the Michigan Supreme Court. (Nessel amicus at pp 7.) Therefore, the mere inclusion of these zones—even if clarity is added—could cause the entire Act to fall. Student safety zones are not required under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). It is one of the many ways Michigan’s SORA goes beyond the requirements of SORNA. The bill does attempt to clarify what constitutes an exclusion zone, which is a help. But it falls short in its definition of a school safety zone. It defines the zone as 1,000 feet or less from school property line (Sec 33(3)). It is unlikely that individuals will know where those property lines are, particularly since school property often extends a considerable distance from the school building itself and can include play yards and fields whose boundaries are not clearly delineated. Thus, the vagueness problems that Judge Cleland identified in 2015, see Doe v Snyder, 101 F Supp 3d 672 (ED Mich, 2015); Doe v Snyder, 101 F Supp 3d 722 (ED Mich, 2015), remain. The bill also takes a positive step in fixing a vagueness problem by removing references to, and the definition of, “loitering” in school safety zones, Sec 33(b), and by adding some exceptions such as transport to and from school, attendance at school events, meetings with school employees, and intermittent passing through for work (Sec 34(4)(a)–(d)). These exceptions help registrants to stay connected to children and family members—which promotes stability. The bill should also indicate whether the restrictions are imposed 24/7 or just during school hours and whether there are exceptions for non-school activities that are held on school property (for example, a private dance studio recital where the studio has rented space in a high school theatre or auditorium).
    Tiers
    HB 5679 took a significant step forward in removing the tiers for pre-2011 registrants (Sec 2a(2)). The tiers were part of what drove the Sixth Circuit to conclude that SORA is an unconstitutional Ex Post Facto violation. The Sixth Circuit said that “SORA ascribes and publishes tier classifications corresponding to the state’s estimation of present dangerousness without providing for any individualized assessment.” Does #1-5, 875 F3d at 703. And the Court noted that the tiers “are unappealable.” Id. But for post-2011 registrants, the tiers remain. Again, the tiers are tied to offenses rather than to degree of risk, which burdens the registrant without adequately addressing public safety concerns. Thus, the problems with the tiers as outlined by the Sixth Circuit may remain unconstitutional for registrants moving forward.
    The Honorable Graham Filler, Chair Page 4 May 11, 2020
    In-person reporting requirements The bill reduces the burden of reporting requirements by slightly extending the reporting periods. But it still requires in-person reporting on a wide variety of information unless the Michigan State Police comes up with a different system. The in-person reporting is burdensome especially for registrants who must do so for life. Id. For those whose offenses were after 2011, the lengths of registration, including lifetime registration, remain. For all others, the period is 25 years or 10 years after release from incarceration, whichever is longer, or lifetime registration if the registrant has committed certain offenses. These requirements, especially the voluntary nature of an MSP alternative to in-person reporting, are still problematic based on the fact that the Sixth Circuit focused on SORA’s “cumbersome in-person” reporting. Does #1-5, 875 F3d at 703. The Court specifically noted that the requirement that registrants make frequent in-person visits to law enforcement “appears to have no relationship to public safety at all.” Id. at 705. In sum, I appreciate your careful consideration of these comments and concerns. And once again, I thank you for the opportunity to be a part of this important, ongoing discussion. Sincerely,

    Dana Nessel Attorney General
    DN

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 *

.