Should registered sex offenders be allowed to serve on juries, just as other convicted felons?
A judge said Wednesday she is inclined to dismiss a lawsuit filed against the Los Angeles Superior Court and state Attorney General Xavier Becerra in which five registered sex offenders say they and people like them are being unconstitutionally barred from serving as jurors.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Barbara Scheper, saying there are “novel issues the court is being asked to consider,” took the case brought by the Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws under submission. She said she may have a ruling next week.
The alliance is representing four men and one woman in the suit filed last Nov. 7 against Becerra and Sherri Carter, the clerk of the Los Angeles Superior Court. They are challenging a 2019 state law that they say initially was written to allow all convicted felons, including registered sex offenders, to be jurors.
However, the bill was later amended “to target registrants by making them the sole class of persons excluded from that bill’s reforms,” according to the suit.
In their court papers, lawyers for Becerra state that the Legislature “could have rationally been concerned with juror bias … harbored by persons who are subject to continuing, intrusive government monitoring, surveillance, and supervision.”
Plaintiffs’ attorney Janice M. Bellucci countered that even convicted murderers can now serve as jurors. She said the way to try and limit bias is through peremptory challenges during jury selection so that sex offenders could be eliminated from those cases in which they could be suspected of being partial. She maintains the current law is unconstitutional.
“In their court papers, lawyers for Becerra state that the Legislature “could have rationally been concerned with juror bias … harbored by persons who are subject to continuing, intrusive government monitoring, surveillance, and supervision.”
I like how they accidentally layout how BS the registry is and making a matter of record. Intrusive surveillance and supervision by the government? Why that sounds awful like being in custody!
I don’t understand how they can continue to have their cake and eat it, too?
Awesome Janice. Thank you. Thank you Thank you.
I hope the judge looks at the case carefully.
A registrant could catch all the shady tactics employed by prosecutors so of course they don’t want one on a jury.
How this isn’t considered punishment and being in custody is beyond me. I’m convinced that the climate is changing because of all the hot air coming out of government officials!! Come on judge rule on what’s in the constitution and not on emotions.
So we are under surveillance now??? I thought we were completely free according to the state.
Sarcasm aside, I really hope we can use the bs to our advantage later.
Janice, could this lawyers comments be potentially used in a case against the registry should the judge dismiss this case based on this lawyer arguments? It sounds a lot like he’s saying RC’s are all “in custody” and thus bitter.
Janice dear with due respect I have to applaude you again. I am glad you took on this case. Yes this jury issue sounds like a double standard right in front of your eyes and yes I’m glad you and the team are persuing this. Why would they call a sex offender to jury duty. If one was keeping records they would of known that the person was a sex offender. Thats like why was Donald Trump committee still sending me e-mails asking me for Donations when he should of known I was on the registry.
Odd isn’t it. Nothing suprises one today when man is going above one’s ordain authority and over-riding in this in type of “Fools Parade” of true justice and values. No wonder some want to leave the country and this passport run amuck giberish and I thoughgt their was safety in numbers.
My sister was on jury duty at one time and it was a case of someone being a drug dealer in this possission if he was or wasn’t this pusher man. Course they let him go at that time. So what if one induced drugs to a teenaged victim they meet on the internet in this fictitous wargame would they also add another charge such as drug pusher or who supplies the condom’s today or do they ask you to bring your own.
Now how many teenage women would not know about that unless they knew it all or unless mothers said if your going to have sex in junior high be sure to carry your rubbers in case the boys don’t have them. This has been a public service message in this vain conceit of publc safety for your teenage asking for sex via the internet. Is that what this is all about.
I really don’t understand the appeal to serve on a jury when inevitably the entire jury is going to know your status. They might let us in the jury pool but we’ll never get picked. Does not sound fun to me but have it.
Honestly when you label someone a sex offender you have banished them from society and all civil duties . Why serve on a jury that benefits the society that banishes you and curses you that hates you.
America better not ask me to do any kind of civil duty or anything that contributes to the benefit of society because I’m not a part of their society and I’m not going to sit here and act like I am by putting on a nice shirt and tie to sit on a jury in the name of Justice when every single registry in America constitutional rights have been taken away who cares about Justice at this point.
People on the registry are starting to slowly form their own Society which really makes the American government nervous if you think they don’t Patrol this website and read our comments your crazy.
Law enforcement knows IML is useless and those are the words of the Attorney General not mine.
I was given a jury summons and for the first time in my life, was hoping to be able to serve my civic duty as a law-abiding member of society for the better part of 20 years. To my shock, I learned I am disqualified for simply being on the registry for a law that was passed decades after my conviction and sentencing. This is clearly a violation of Due Process which is supposed to be afforded to me under the United States Constitution. I was never given an opportunity to go back to court on this matter and feel that I have been once again, banished from participating in what is considered a normal part of life for most citizens. Also, I am certain that because the law doesn’t excuse other convicted felons, the Equal Protection clause of our constitution has also been violated.
“bias … harbored by persons who are subject to continuing, intrusive government monitoring, surveillance, and supervision.”*
Oh wait, I got the solution!!!
How about California STOPS the “continuing, intrusive government monitoring, surveillance, and supervision” and simply eliminates it’s S.O. Registry!!
There it is, folks!!
Problem solved!! 🤗 😃
*BTW, is it just me…. or does that description sound exactly identical to probation or parole, but without a time limitation?? 🤷🏻♂️