ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


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

National

NJ: Sex Offenders Lose in Attempt to Remove Names From Registry

[usnews.com – 3/18/20]

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — The New Jersey Supreme Court this week rejected an attempt by two sex offenders to have their names removed from a public registry.

Two offenders identified only as H.D. and J.M. pleaded guilty to sexual offenses in the 1990s and guilty in 2001 to other offenses, one for computer-related theft and one for failure to register as a sex offender, and were sentenced to probation.
State law imposes lifetime registration requirements on offenders but allows those on the registry to apply for removal if they haven’t committed a crime within 15 years following “conviction or release from a correctional facility for any term of imprisonment imposed” and are “not likely to pose a threat to the safety of others.”

H.D. and J.M. argued they are now eligible for removal since neither has had a conviction for more than 15 years, since 2001.
The state disagreed, arguing that the law bars anyone on the registry from seeking removal if they commit any crime within the first 15 years following conviction for the underlying sex offense.

Read the full article

 

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.  
 
17 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

That’s crazy. If they haven’t been convicted of anything they’re innocent.

It’s not as bad as the USA news makes it seem guys. Here’s a better article from courthouse news. https://www.courthousenews.com/one-shot-at-deregistering-nj-court-tells-sex-offenders/

One shot to get your privacy back¿???????? The sex offender were the first citizens SOLD OUT to big data & database doodads! The rest of AMERICA’s privacy came right along as collateral damage. Yes it’s equal protection or no protection at all. Except some have control over the surveillance saints or the cash to buy them out. Even in the case one manages to remove oneself from the STATE’S registry does not equate to removal from FED machines, nor the myriad of PRIVATE party machines. If a state may lawfully indenture a human for life without process and ex post… Read more »

@Tim: I don’t necessarily (right now) fight to be removed from the Fed machines, the digital history, etc. I just want to be free from the restrictions (as if on parole) and not on a public hit list. Even if I committed a technical violation (which no others endure) after 18 years of no sex crimes, can’t I….. ever? According to the ruling, a person once they are free from incarceration or any offense, committing an offense within the first 15 years bars them for life to ever prove they aren’t a danger to society. That does not define a… Read more »

Peace love dove,
Good , fighting for individual removal is fruitless. Once the file is created by DOJ and saved it will also be copied repeatedly by various parties, public and private. That is why fair trials are essential to long lasting compacts. As DNA exoneration proves fair trial is elusive at best in Sex cases.

A database & the ability to convict with no real verification of actual guilt. Ask me how I know. What more could a tyrant king need?

Let’s be clear about something. A sex crime conviction in NJ places the offender on supervision for life. That is the same conditions as if on parole. This case is not just about having to register for life, it’s about being on “parole” for life with all its glorious conditions.

I’m a touch confused. Does this mean they must be crime free for 15 years? Or, does this mean they must be (one guy had a computer theft issue) crime free after the computer issue for 15 years? If you read SB 384, there are parameters written to address this.

Yes you are ….*** ADMINS MSG: NO PERSONAL INSULTS *** This is a decision by the New Jersey Supreme Court and as such has absolutely nothing to do with California SB 384.

I am not surprised by your confusion. Not even a touch.

I also noted the term infraction? Traffic violation? Really? What if they went to traffic school lol? Dismissed

@USA: there is no term infraction in the law. It says offense.

@ Tim: with due respect you do make a good point and after all these years I have to agree with you or should we all be missing something today with this announcement. While I haven’t touched base with Janice in many years and with due respect we are all looking for insight in much of this registry. Tim I’m glad you have brought up the database. For years I have pondered on that also or should we all say own’s the cattle of a thousand fields? Isn’t that database enough for true understanding or were is mixed review’s in… Read more »

I’m going to have to get a spell checker thats all their is to it. All I am saying is Janice’s team is in there for those mixed up in this ordeal and to have some faith that things will come up smelling like roses that we will all get off the registry. Yes Janice has my full story of my two day event with this registry ordeal by computer and yes a stamped copy of a letter the Commonwealth of VA for acknowledgement about a pardon and yes I was thinking about you the ones on the registry also.… Read more »

I suggest clicking onto Jack’s link and reading the 3rd paragraph. They use the term infraction. Truly grateful for your support Joe.

Tim I’m not saying your wrong as their are many advantanges to a computer but when its used in an unjust way it is a hazzard to both parties. Tim you have a very good view and yes that was well taken, I hope your not offended. So forgive me on that. I guess it would be like the saying open mouth insert foot. Was breaking off with England a very good view at the time or what caused the event. Even people wonder about that today or who made the right choice. Even the constitution and the bill of… Read more »

“The decision is at odds with the explicit purpose of Megan’s Law, which is to protect the public against those who do pose a risk.” (said public defender).
I understand the decision, but it’s opposed to the public safety intent of the Registry. It maintains a bloated Registry. It’s dumb and it does a serious disservice to the public.

@David: You are 100% correct. My one and only “victim” was my child and we have since (long ago) gained the ability (through the courts) to see each other and even to live with each other if desired. I do not understand why society requires me to still be “as if on parole”. The “law” as written discusses me.

@love, peace and happiness.. I like your style and your comments hold a refreshing viewpoint. Yes when my dad passed away in 83 at the age of 83 it was heartbreaking as all deaths are heartbreak in. Many of times he would take off his belt on several occasions and whip me good. Discipline if you want to say for correction. Today you can’t even whip a child as that is against the law. Sure he had a good library of Thomas Jefferson and a few on Lincoln, sure he lost interest in voting as the years went by. And… Read more »

17
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.