ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings

California

CA Legislature Passes Senate Bill 145

On the last day possible, the California legislature passed Senate Bill 145.  The bill now goes to the Governor who has up to 30 days to sign or veto it.

“Senate Bill 145 has been controversial since its introduction,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “Due to the dedication of its author, Senator Scott Wiener, Senate Bill 145 was passed over the objections of the Appropriations Committee chair and despite multiple threats of physical harm.”

If the Governor signs the bill, judges will have discretion regarding whether to require an individual who performs certain sexual acts with a person 10 years or younger to register as a sex offender.  In the past, judges have lacked discretion in that area and as a result many gay men have been added to the sex offender registry.

ACSOL has supported Senate Bill 145 since its introduction and more than 100 members of ACSOL have testified in support of the bill during committee hearings.

Related

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/what-would-qanon-debates-look-congress-california-offers-clue-n1239217

Join the discussion

  1. DPH

    Praise The Lord! Let fairness prevail for.LGBTQ, the law failed ME and hundreds of others on the Reg that had Real relationships not 1 nihht stands, suffered the judge wrath w/o any wiggle room to hear The Truth and the Jury ignorance of houth live less than 10.yrs apart. WOW ,.maybe someday.post Gov. Newsome signs k÷Epona Lorema.b I nit away from the Gov
    Treating A sex worse than V sex .
    Gov sign this has been So Unfair!
    New youth in courts may prevail equal rights under the law.for.the same.youth that exists for str8 youth.
    SO many under LGBT’s have been punished unfairly to this day, may it take affect pist Gov sig by 2021.
    I am crying for justice.

    • Georgia Barnette

      Keep crying, this is a disgusting bill
      Why anyone thinks it’s ok to have sex with a child is beyond my understanding

      • D Manning

        If not the bill should be more detailed. It should be a felony to have sex with anyone under 18 if the age difference is over 2 or 3 years (and not consensual).; salutatory rape. It should be a misdemeanor if there is or was consent from the minor because it’s still wrong!

        • Will Allen

          Nope. If a “minor” is allowed to operate a motor vehicle on roads that my family uses, then that “minor” is mature enough to consent (or not) to sex. It is not the job of big government to raise our children either. Parents – do your fucking job. Stop trying to grow big government to solve all your irresponsibility.

        • totally against public registry

          The age of statutory rape needs to change. 14 year olds have sex, that’s the reality. No one should be punished for having consensual sex. Laws in this country are dictated by religion and that is where the whole problem is! The taboo surrounding sex is so strong that law makers can make any stupid law and it will boast their name and power.

  2. SR

    That’s good news! But it’s so disheartening to keep reading how much the general public seems to misunderstand what the bill actually does. All anyone thinks this allows is making it perfectly okay for a 20-year-old to have sex with a 10-year-old.

    • Mic

      Please explain the bill then. Because the way I am reading it if someone(27 years old) has sex with person 17 years old then the judge can make the a sex offender or not??? If you’re over 18 yes it’s your choice but if you’re under 18 and they had sex with you. They should be a sex offender. Not bashing the bill just trying to understand it

      • SR

        That’s correct in what you said. The bill has no affect on victims 14 and under otherwise, so my original example stands.

        Also, because you don’t seem to be aware of it, majority of our states have the age of consent set to 16. CA is one of only a handful of states that has it at 18. So judges having this discretion puts it slightly in line with how it’s not even a crime in majority of the country to do what you described in your example.

        • Mic

          So what if it’s a 23 year old and 13 year old?

        • NPS

          No. Your example DOES NOT stand. The law is written as follows: a person convicted of a violation of subdivision (b) of Section 286, subdivision (b) of Section 287, or subdivision (h) or (i) of Section 289 shall not be required to register if, at the time of the offense, the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor, as measured from the minor’s date of birth to the person’s date of birth, and the conviction is the only one requiring the person to register. This paragraph does not preclude the court from requiring a person to register pursuant to Section 290.006.

          The codes above are specific to minors aged 14-17 and each of those codes are wobbler offenses. However, look at the fine print. Just because you don’t have to register doesn’t mean you won’t.

          I’m straight. My offense is non-registerable and a misdemeanor (now expunged). Registration was not required. But under 290.006, the judge required it. This was in Orange County. How much you want to bet that LGBQs will still be required to register if the offense happened in OC? This law won’t have much of an impact if you live in conservative areas.

        • SR

          You’re responding to my answer that literally addressed that with the first paragraph. Victims 14 and under are unaffected by this law. You do anything like this to someone 14 and under, and you’ll need to register. The judge will have no say about it.

        • SR @ NPS

          What did I say that wasn’t accurate? I said this won’t prevent mandatory registration in the case of a 20 year old and a 10 year old. That this only affects gay acts with those 14+, to bring into the same alignment as hetero acts. I pretty much assume most judges will still want to register the person. They now just have an option not to unlike before.

        • NPS

          My bad. Read it wrong. I thought you were saying that the law would allow a 20 year old to sleep with a 10 year old, which it doesn’t. But I stand by my opinion that this law won’t change anything as long as a judge can use 290.006. As a straight person, I’m not required to register but The judge ordered it anyway. Rep. Wiener thinks straight couples have an advantage not afforded to gay couples when in actuality they don’t.

    • Thomas Haley

      It is not OK. Period. Just the elite and the trillion $$ child trafficking easier to control. When in reality they all should be well you know. Its sick

      • SR

        This bill didn’t change anything on what the laws already allowed for heterosexual crimes. All it did was bring into alignment what the law allowed for gay crimes.

      • Mimi

        You’re absolutely right! It’s aimed at making sexual predators safe in California. 14 is a child!

        • TS

          What section speaks to bill only applying to 14+?

          The way I’ve read it, this law doesn’t change any prosecution of illegal acts, only the need to register.

          As a father of 2 toddlers, I would feel much better knowing individuals that had been convicted of sexual acts with a child were visible in the registry.

          I’m all for equality and I applaud the strides in that direction, but what I do not appreciate is the apparent grey area with the 10yr range. Why was 10yrs chosen? Why not 5? Why not 2? Why not 15?
          I agree that if there is law for a straight couple, it should be the same law accommodation for gay couples as well… I just don’t see why kids are brought into picture.

          Can someone shine some light and provide the sections of the law that I am apparently missing?

        • TS

          The TS who wrote this reply is NOT the same TS that has been writing here for the past several years, but another one with their own concerns.

        • Will Allen

          TS (https://all4consolaws.org/2020/09/ca-legislature-passes-senate-bill-145/comment-page-1/#comment-256504):

          Good, because I thought you’d lost your mind. Talking as if Registries are sensible or acceptable, LOL. What a joke.

        • TS @Will Allen

          I have not lost my mind on that point! They’re a joke!

        • Johnny Roacoe

          @mimi, are you one of the million moms against registrants or something! This page is not welcome to you. We do not judge our FELLOW registrants. We offer support. Learn how to read the law before opening your mouth. This law was passed and will be law! It supports the gay community understand that! It does not allow legal sex with a MINOR!! It protects for example, a lesbian relationship, for example she was 19 and the other 16. If she goes to court the judge would have no choice but to make her a registered sex offender. If she were straight he has the OPTION not too. You cannot say straight people can have the option by the judge whether they have to register and then say gays the judge has no discretion! That is why this bill passed! And please stop calling someone who had sex with a minor a predator. That is not the definition of a predator! It’s people like you that keep the registry over bloated and useless to law enforcement. Your stranger danger crap doesn’t hold up. 95 percent of sex crimes BY people the victim knows!! Get educated and please get off this forum. We don’t support people like you bashing us and our families.

    • Georgia Barnette

      You are correct, and what else matters? Sex with a minor, oh hell no

      • Christina

        You are a predator if you seek out a person who is not an adult and you are an adult…. Because the younger person is easier to manipulate and they don’t have the life experience and lessons and practice at getting or even knowing what they want. Your desire to “get off” at the expense of their innocence and taking away a chance to figure out what they like and who they are with their peers and people who are at their level or close to it on the playing field. They should not be taken advantage of for the sexual satisfaction or any kind of selfish want or desire that doesn’t include the well-being of the minor who may very well have a crush on or infatuation with the adult or may be craving attention and seeking love and acceptance from an adult, which should not in anybody’s eyes be okay to take that vulnerability and use it for your personal sexual gratification. Don’t try to tell me that most or even half of these type situations involve the adult actually really caring about the well being of the minor, because they do not or they would not choose orgasm over well-being of minor. That’s a predator …. A thing looking for something weaker and vulnerable to attack and devour. I say it fits fine. Most people would say it fits fine. You are only justifying because you are the monster in question.

        • LPH

          @Christina: Your comment has nothing to do with bill 145. More than 95% of sex crimes do not involve a predator.

    • Reice

      Explain to me what’s good about this because I’m lost.

      • Bill

        @ Reice

        Read my earlier comment about this if you want to know what’s good about this.

    • G

      Your right it just allows a 24 yr old to have sex with a 15yr old but sb345 which starts next year has no provisions for under 14 year olds so hey maybe your example will still work for that one

      • SR

        Its not “allowed”. The gay person just might not have to register. All other punishments still stand. This is something the judge was already allowed to do for a straight person.

        • Jameson Canning

          The fact that they have that leeway in cases involving heterosexual activity is wrong. The legislature should be working to protect minors, not sexual offenders.

  3. MerlinMedic

    So will a 25 year old having sex with a 15 year old have to register as sex offender? Will they still be charged with statutory rape?

    • Bill

      @ All The People That Are Railing Against This Bill

      This does nothing to change CA laws in regards to having sex with minors. People who are caught are still prosecuted and punished. Only difference is the judge has the discretion to label or not label the prosecuted.

      In a Registry that is bloated with individuals caught peeing in public and other non-contact crimes, this is the first step in alleviating the hysterical paranoia that the public has drunk and politicians has used for political gain.

      There’s nothing to back up the efficacy of the Registry in protecting the public, in fact 95% of new sexual assaults against children are committed by people NOT on the Registry. They are committed by people that are in a position of trust like teachers, coaches, police, clergy, politicians, parents, and so on…not some stereotypical stranger hiding in the bushes.

      I’m pretty certain some of you will disregard this comment for it does not coincide with your world view but for the rest you, keep reading up, keep educating yourself, because what you don’t know about SORNA could land you or your loved ones on this Registry.

      • CKB

        People crying against this bill saying it protects predators or the like have clearly not spent enough time practicing basic reading comprehension. The bill is about who and who does not have to register, not who or who does not get either jail, prison or probation. That consequence is still applicable.

        What is telling is people clearly view registration as punishment and not some civil regulation. These people want people punished (read: forced to register), and for them that is being put on a registry.

      • Jameson Canning

        They should all have to register, staright or gay, no body should be allowed to hide that kind of behavior if convicted. This bill is regressive.

        • Chris

          100%. Instead of proposing this, they need to make them all (gay and straight) have to register.

        • Will Allen

          Nope.

          Registries are idiotic social policy and a lot worse than just worthless. They aren’t needed, aren’t beneficial, are counterproductive, harm all of America, and put every single person in America in more danger than we would be if Registries did not exist.

          Today, there are no informed, moral people who support Registries. Not a single one.

        • JAB

          @Jameson Cunning. Who in the world made you judge and persecutor. an 18-year-old high school senior could have a relationship with a 17 or even a 16-year-old and you’re telling me he should be subjected to a lifetime of this crap. Please do not get on our website which where we support one another we do not judge and break down one another for what might or might not have happened in their past. Registration does nothing for the public. It is meant to give law enforcement loads and loads of money and a false sense of security for the public. Maybe you need to educate yourself a little bit and read more in depth about what true sexual predators do versus one time teenage offenders and the risk is. 95% of all cases are not from typical stranger danger. They are from people you know. So tell me how is your registry working so far? Over 1 million and counting in the United States alone. Did protect any children or save any children from being murdered? Stop judging people when you don’t know what their circumstances are concerning their case. I’m sure the majority of us On here Believe that true offenders that have an issue and keep re-offending should be incarcerated for a long time and given treatment. The same way those drug addicts that sell drugs to your kids and murder them the same way that drunk drivers who kill innocent people on sidewalks and on our streets are giving second third and fourth chances and the ability to have treatment. Do you donate money to ACSOL, do you come to meetings, and have you ever been and listenEd to Catherine Carpenter at one of our annual conferences? No of course you haven’t, because if you did, you would know that every registrant is not a one size fits all people they were hard-working and decent people that got involved in a one time mistake and yeah that might be an older individual like 18, 19 or 20 having sex with somebody under the age of 18. I’m not talking about forcibly raping somebody, or molestation g little children, this new bill that was passed doesn’t promote that. And I’m sorry your comment that everyone should have to register is very ignorant and not fact based. I pray to God that you or none of your children accidentally run into a situation that might possibly put them on the registry for something very minimal. But if that does happen we will be sitting here waiting for you and show you lots of support and can’t wait for you to apologize to those of us and our family that you have hurt by your comments. The registry does nothing to protect the public, it does everything to disenfranchise an individual who might’ve made a one time mistake and would like to go on in life and become successful and have a normal life which I’m sorry every registrant is entitled to. You should read Frank Lindsey‘s book. A wonderful man with a big heart who made a one time mistake in his life and has been hindered because of that registry along with millions of others.

        • SR

          We should register all criminals. Why should the DUI guy get a pass after pass after pass? Or my stepfather that nearly beat my mother to death and went on to multiple more divorces for the same reason. Or burglars and robbers with a mile long rap sheet. Why would you not want to know about all the wrong things people did in your community?

        • Sandy

          AMEN!

    • Janine Patch

      please show me exactly where this talks about children of certain sexes or ages. It just states minors???

  4. Leslie Wilcox

    Can someone that ACTUALLY understands this give me the CLIFF NOTES because what I’m understanding is that this makes it legal for 24 year old adult to have sexual intercourse with a “consenting” 14 year old, if that’s even a thing.

    • SR

      It in no way makes it legal. Its still a crime. It just now brings up a gay person doing this to the same standard as a straight person doing it, in that the judge has the discretion whether or not the person will have to register. It would be incredibly unlikely a judge would not require the 24 year old to register in your example.

      Again, a judge already had this discretion with straight person in your example, but not gay. Now they do with a gay person as well.

    • GP

      I found this description online and it summarizes the bill well. The bill does not legalize any form of pedophilia, but rather addresses issues regarding sex offender registration.

      “SB 145 does not legalize any kind of sex with a minor and does not change the potential sentence for having sex with an underage person. Rather, the bill simply gives judges the ability to evaluate whether or not to require registration as a sex offender. To be clear, this judicial discretion for sex offender registration is *already* the law for penile-vaginal intercourse when the minor is aged between 14 to 17 years old and the offender is within 10 years of age of the minor. SB 145 simply extends that same discretion to other forms of intercourse. A judge will maintain the authority to place someone on the registry if the behavior at issue was predatory or otherwise egregious. This change will treat straight and LGBTQ youth equally, end the discrimination against LGBTQ people, and ensure that California stops stigmatizing specific sexual acts.”

  5. Jalaina

    I don’t know if people are looking to be offended. But the law didn’t change by much.

    Before if a straight couple that was 18 and 16 had P in V sex the 18 y/o wouldn’t automatically go on the sex offenders registry. But if the couple were gay and had anal sex the 18 y/o would automatically go on the registry.

    It doesn’t say that someone can have sex with minors without consequences. It just doesn’t punish same-sex couples more severely than straight couples.

    • jesse

      Nonsense. Any straight couple having any kind of oral, anal or digital sexual contact goes on the registry. It has nothing to do with sexual orientation or the gender of the participants.

      While same-sex couples, admittedly, lack the required parts to avoid mandatory registration, it applies to boy / girl AND girl / boy just the same (i.e. the 17 year old senior quarterback fingering his cute PE Teacher – the teacher will go straight on the registry, and the 17 year old high school senior will sue the school district for millions for being a child victim of child sexual abuse).

  6. Mike

    This article is SO POORLY WRITTEN that it gives people the wrong impression of the law. PLEASE read the law and edit the article! It says that judges will be given discretion on whether to register a person if they have certain sex acts with a child 10 years of age or younger. This is so not the law! Read it! Understand it! And if you can’t understand and write intelligently, shut up!

  7. E

    This is why California is a shit show. Anyone who has sex with a minor gay straight whomever should have to register and not “avoid” the registry. Y’all people in California can keep that energy over there we don’t play that on the east coast.

    • jesse

      Your friendly reminder that in 80% of the US, including many if not most places on the East Coast, sex with a minor – gay or straight – is not only NOT a registerable sex offense, it is perfectly legal and no crime and certainly no sex offense at all. Who is the shit show now?

      On the topic of shit shows…. who are all these hysterical people here – who obviously lack basic reading and comprehension skills? What is happening?

      • M C

        @jesse, the hysterical people you are talking about who also lack comprehension skills fall under the same category as vigilantes who have done very awful things to people they think haven’t been punished enough by having been to prison and in most cases put on a registry. They are actually very dangerous people and I would not even engage them or in any way respond to their very stupid comments. Because they are such dangerous people they should (but won’t be) placed on a registry of potentially dangerous person’s likely to take the law into their own hands and accordingly be carefully watched. It also adds proof to the claim that the Registry is a shaming punishment. It’s very clear these people want to keep punishing those for which this bill provides relief even beyond the registry and their obligations under the current laws. If they really cared about anything besides hurting RSO’s as much as possible, they would instead engage in our discussions in attempt to find solutions we can all agree on together.

        • Will Allen

          Yep.

          Registry Supporters/Terrorists don’t care about facts or reality. I also think that most of the time those people themselves tend to have lengthy criminal records. I’ve had active, career criminals speak to me as if I’m scum, LOL. But most of them are just demonstrably stupid, so I wouldn’t expect them to act intelligently.

          Personally, I think that nearly all smart, moral, successful people do NOT support the Registries, and certainly not the “extra” harassment “laws” that the Registries have enabled and promoted. RS/Ts are the dregs of society. I would LOVE to see a study of who actually supports the Registries. It’s not the good people.

        • KM in SoCal

          @WillAllen I wish registry supporters were all “idiots” or “stupid” but sadly I learned even smart people impacted by registries still quietly support them for others. My wife who says that its injustice for me to be on it because she knows me and that I am not a “sex offender” (her words) every one else is. She wants to end just my obligation, because it hurts her and our daughter, but to hell with everybody ele. All because a british quack doctor says we cant change because that how were wired in the womb. We can’t help ourselves, we can’t be cured, but we can and should be punished utill we die or watched closely until death. She has an associates degree and great at research on every subject EXCEPT sex offences. Those she won’t hear any evidence contrary to her view. I know I’ve tried. I bet most family members of RSOs are the same. Their fight ends when their loved one deregisters.

        • Will Allen

          @KM in SoCal (https://all4consolaws.org/2020/09/ca-legislature-passes-senate-bill-145/comment-page-1/#comment-256544):

          Hmmm, I’m not sure I can do this justice.

          I might start by suggesting that perhaps, no offense, that she isn’t that smart or perceptive because she has been dealing and living with Registries very directly and has not determined that Registries are worthless. I’m immediately suspicious of her cognitive skills. But perhaps that is due to how you live? I don’t know if I have enough time to think about this, LOL.

          I think that if she lived with me, and even if I never spoke to her about it, that she would realize that Registries are useless. I think she’d also realize that Registries are very, very dangerous.

          I don’t know. Perhaps you should tell her that her Registries have gotten innocent people, including children, murdered. And that plenty of people believe that people who support Registries are complicit. I hold them all accountable.

          She should take a look around at all the hate in our country and embrace it, I guess. That is what people are establishing for their children. And their grandchildren. People who support Registries should never complain about hate, destruction, and lack of empathy in America. It’s what we’ve signed up for. I feel like people who want to judge others and impact their lives, deserve the same and more. So people can’t complain when it happens.

          People Forced to Register probably harmed someone. That is why they were punished and paid consequences. They transgressed and paid for it. Registry Supporters/Harassers are transgressing today. They deserve punishment for it. They will do it tomorrow. They will deserve punishment tomorrow. They deserve to be punished until they stop harassing others.

          Personally, I don’t deal with people who think Registries are acceptable. I don’t think that is just “an opinion”. I think that shows what they are. When I find out that a person believes or supports certain things, then I understand that he/she is not a good person. I stay away from bad people. I surround myself with good, moral, winning people.

        • M C

          @KM in SoCal, My wife apparently had been the same way but it wasn’t really brought up until recently because I’m not on a registry right now. I was on the registry before we were married but were together. It came up recently when I tried to discuss the proposed changes by the Attorney General and how that would likely force me to re-register. She mostly disagreed with making anyone ‘re-register’ but defended the registry overall and did not think anyone should ever come off it. She changed her tune since I presented her with many examples of people who are just like you and I so I understand where you are coming from. At first I had gotten the “how can you defend those people? They are not the same as you!” The problem is that’s just not true. Most people ARE the same as me because there is barely anyone on the registry who is the monster everyone thinks the someone on the registry is. I’m going to defend them because I’m going to defend myself. The fact is if your wife supports this registry, she supports YOU being on it, period. Since she supports you being on it maybe it’s time to re-evaluate who you’re with. At least that is how I think about it. Just like you, I could not get her to pay attention to the true facts about the registry but I very seriously would have filed for divorce over it because I can’t be with someone who fails to support me. I made that VERY clear and then finally she was willing to listen to the facts as well as how much it is going to affect our family and children should the new proposed changes to SORNA be adopted. Then she agreed with my stance at least she says she does. I can never know for sure but if I ever hear anything about her supporting the registry again its over.

    • David⚜️

      @ E: Please stay on the East Coast.

      • A.D.A.T.

        @David

        Don’t worry, sounds like he would have a hard time scraping up enough money to get this far.

  8. Dustin

    Just another showing of why the registry should be abolished, and that no amendment or modification will make it clearer, “better”, or useful in any kind of way.

    To registry supporters, do you seriously carry a copy of your local sex offender registry around on the off chance that you might run into someone on it? Do you background check every single person you ever meet and leave your children alone with them if they’re not registered? Do you check the registry frequently and update the copy you keep? Do you dig into court records of individual offenses? Are you interested in the identities and locations of drug dealers, gang members, arsonists, burglars, or white collar criminals? If so, are you clamoring for registries for them to “protect” you? If the answer to ANY of that is “no” (though that is the most likely the answer to ALL of it), then the registry does absolutely nothing for you beyond increasing your taxes to pay for it.

    Brace yourself, but the politicians have been lying to you. Recidivism of convicted burglars and drug/alcohol offenders (users and dealers) are at least 5 times that of sex offender registrants (the overwhelming majority of whom are arrested for registry violations, if anything). Every law they propose in simple pandering to you and, more often than not, lining their own pockets or those of their associates. Those same politicians that you think are protecting your children would kill and eat your children in front of you if it would get you to keep electing them. Honestly, as everyone complains about how incompetent government is at everything it does, why would anyone entrust their family’s security and welfare to it?

    The government can only deal with crimes after they occur. They cannot and will never be able to prevent crime of any kind (nor do they want to, evidenced by the child porn and entrapment stings they persist in). Protecting yourself and your family is YOUR responsibility, not the state’s. The more you rely on the state to protect you, the more vulnerable you become.

    • Will Allen

      Good summary. Registries are for dumb people. They are just intended to be a pacifier. Here, stick this pacifier in your mouth and stop whining.

      When I raised my children, I had no need for Registries. If anyone told me I ought to get big government’s help to raise my children, I would’ve lmao. I have new neighbors right now. They seem like extremely nice people. But I won’t for one second assume that they are not all maniacal, active child molesters. Not for one second. Do I need a big government list to show me that big government doesn’t think they “dangerous”? Hilarious. No thanks, I’ll go ahead and actually protect my family, in actual reality.

    • Brandon

      @ Dustin

      If someone really carries around their precious registry with them 24/7 or when they go out I’d bust a gut from laughing. Oh no that person matches my hit list better call the cops, “ Hello someone looks to be one of them perverts please come and protect me.” Cops arrive and that person is not on the hit list, but we have another Karen.

  9. jesse

    This is not a sexual orientation specific bill. It is conduct specific and applies to all combinations of genders and all sexual orientations. While same sex couples would be, for lack of alternatives, be more impacted by this, it is not a homosexual issue, and certainly not a gay male issue. Sen. Weiner is shamelessly pandering to his base by packaging it that way.

    Fundamentally, this restores Hofsheier. That is a good thing. But specifically, the inclusion of the age band is problematic at best. Those are always absurd. Because a 17 year old having a relationship with someone who is 3,651 days older, while still a crime, is not so bad. Same 17 year old having a relationship with someone 3,652 days older renders the other person a threat to society that must be tracked. I have seen cases where trained jurists are figuring out the significance of minutes in the time of birth between “perpetrator” and “victim”.

    I expect this bill to be challenged and enormous resources spent on it. The only person really benefiting is Sen. Weiner.

  10. Confused Man

    Providing discretion to judges is always a good thing. This seems like a victory to me. Kudos to ACSOL for helping it pass.

  11. CKB

    What I find interesting is that all these people come out of the woodwork now as though SB 145 is introducing something entirely new, which we know that it is not. It is instead updating already existing laws. If these people are so concerned about the possibility of say a 17 engaging in sexual activity with a 27 year old, where were they all this time? The very thing they are so adamant that SB 145 is allowing was already in place before the introduction of this bill.

    So my question is this: what is the narrative being espoused that people are believing that is making them believe all emotional and unable to think critical—not to mention forget how to read?

  12. CKB

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xI-QYjuZig8

    Again, another example of people either unable to read without comprehension or honesty.

    It is important to again note the use of punishment in connection to the registry. For this person, the punishment *is* the registry, as he makes a passing comment that a person may receive other types of punishment.

    This is the problem that is faced, people turning off their rational brain in exchange for emotional hysteria. No one, not even one person is either saying or implying that sexual activity with a minor is okay and should be allowed; no one is arguing for the decriminalization of sexual abuse. However, somehow this is the narrative that the masses want to roll with as though it is based in actual fact.

    It’s sure hard to reason with unreasonable and emotional people.

  13. Resident

    https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/California-bill-eliminating-sex-offender-list-15529263.php

    “The California Supreme Court upheld the legal difference in 2015, arguing that because vaginal intercourse can lead to pregnancy, forcing a father to register as a sex offender would subject him to social stigmatization that could make it difficult to find a job and support his child.“

    Anybody know this case? It’s like the CA Supreme Court is just taunting people on the registry.

    • M C

      @David, This leads me back to this mostly academic paper I posted awhile back suggesting a way to convince courts that the registry is in fact punitive. In the paper, it is suggested that if the majority of the public believes something to be punitive through properly done scientific surveys, it would be likely to carry much weight in a decision as to the punitive nature of the registry as a whole in a court. It seems like the media and everyone commenting on the registry clearly thinks it is punitive and not just a regulatory measure. Just look at the title “California bill to lower penalties for sexual relations with minor..”. Politicians and others in the public nearly always refer to it as a penalty not as something merely regulatory.

  14. Cynthia Devore

    Anyone know how we can find out who voted yay and who voted nay

    • Janice Bellucci

      Date
      08/31/20
      Result
      (PASS)
      Location
      Assembly Floor
      Ayes Count
      41
      Noes Count
      25
      NVR Count
      13
      Motion
      SB 145 Wiener Senate Third Reading By Kamlager
      Ayes
      Aguiar-Curry, Bauer-Kahan, Berman, Bloom, Bonta, Burke, Carrillo, Chiu, Chu, Cooper, Daly, Friedman, Gabriel, Cristina Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kamlager, Levine, Low, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, O’Donnell, Quirk, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Mark Stone, Ting, Weber, Wicks, Wood, Rendon
      Noes
      Bigelow, Boerner Horvath, Brough, Calderon, Chau, Chen, Choi, Cooley, Megan Dahle, Diep, Flora, Fong, Gallagher, Gonzalez, Gray, Kiley, Lackey, Maienschein, Mathis, Obernolte, Patterson, Ramos, Rodriguez, Salas, Waldron
      NVR
      Arambula, Cervantes, Cunningham, Eggman, Frazier, Eduardo Garcia, Grayson, Limón, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Smith, Voepel

      Bill Votes
      Date
      08/31/20
      Result
      (PASS)
      Location
      Senate Floor
      Ayes Count
      23
      Noes Count
      10
      NVR Count
      7
      Motion
      Unfinished Business SB145 Wiener Concurrence
      Ayes
      Allen, Atkins, Beall, Bradford, Caballero, Durazo, Glazer, Lena Gonzalez, Hertzberg, Hill, Jackson, Leyva, McGuire, Mitchell, Monning, Pan, Portantino, Roth, Skinner, Stern, Umberg, Wieckowski, Wiener
      Noes
      Bates, Borgeas, Chang, Dahle, Grove, Melendez, Moorlach, Morrell, Nielsen, Wilk
      NVR
      Archuleta, Dodd, Galgiani, Hueso, Hurtado, Jones, Rubio

  15. Dph

    Thanks for the interestingly enough for Senator.Wiener’s bill passing the 2nd time around w/o Ms. San Diego’s nose blockingg.it.with her radical values. LGF
    Oops, politics.
    We needed to know, now Gov will come through. LGBTQ sufferers.dont want a repeat of our younger LGBTQ youth to.go.through what we’ve been posted as! THX SB145 decades too late…4 decades to be exact but its about time!

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 *

.