ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings


IL: Ex-teaching assistant gets probation for sexually abusing 14-year-old student

[ – 10/30/20]

URBANA — A 24-year-old woman who admitted having sex with a teenage boy for whom she acted as a teaching assistant has been sentenced to four years of probation.

Judge Roger Webber said Friday he did not believe Allyssa Gustafson, who had no prior criminal convictions, was a danger to the public.

However, he said the requirement that she register as a sex offender for life — “the modern-day equivalent of the scarlet letter” — would serve to punish her.

Read the full article


We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. 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.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. 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.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email 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.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

It appears a judge in IL has finally called a spade a spade: in sentencing a woman, “he said the requirement that she register as a sex offender for life — “the modern-day equivalent of the scarlet letter” — would serve to punish her.” Ahh, there’s that word punishment thrown in for good measure, too.

“he said the requirement that she register as a sex offender for life — “the modern-day equivalent of the scarlet letter” — would serve to punish her.”

I can’t see how we can’t use these on the record statements from those tasked with interpreting the law as evidence for ex-post facto litigation. Certainly their statements can be used to show the punitive intent of these laws?

“Not a danger to society,” but we are going to put you on a list that states you are a danger to society, because it will label you as such, scarlet letter, for the rest of your life. That is your punishment.

Instead we could give you a year in jail, with probation, mandate treatment, and give you 5 years on the list while on probation. When its all well and done, we will take you off the list because you have demonstrated that you are not a danger to society, as we already suspected.

1) Good on the judge for realizing this. Smart of them. Another one who can be referred to. Will they be non-selected for cases like this as others in IL have via the DA office?

2) They obviously read the assessment she provided and took that into account but I wonder if there’s more to the judgement given she’s a young mom of two. Given this judgement, will this be precedent for others who offend the same? A lot peeps have the same support networks at home.

3) Will teacher credentialing college programs now teach the legal ramifications to their students of misdeeds such as this (if they didnt)? Surely she is blacklisted from teaching ever again.

Something seems lenient about this case. Do I smell a double standard?
Probation for sexual activity where the female adult is considered culpable?
If the genders & ages were reversed between the two, probation would’ve been prison.

Here are some other links to similar crimes in the state of Illinois. I live right across Illinois’ northern border.

So what if there is a double standard? There definitely should be. Do you seriously believe women and men are exactly the same when it comes to sexual activity? That they have the exact same motivation for it?

While I firmly believe the registry should be eradicated, I say good on California for their decision to leave women off the public registry once the tier system is in place.

You’re setting up a hypocritical double standard that conveniently excuses you for your conviction. You’re also implying that men deserve more punishment than women simply because of their gender. Sorry, it doesn’t work that way – in terms of culpability women are just as culpable as men, you can’t cherry-pick just to convince yourself that you should be segregated from the label of SO.
The public registry is punitive and should be abolished period. Don’t try to divide us by making an argument for one exclusive group versus the other.

“Do you seriously believe women and men are exactly the same when it comes to sexual activity? That they have the exact same motivation for it?”

Please enlighten those of us who don’t understand women. I am their leader.

Not sure about other states, but in Wisconsin there is no mention of gender in the law. It (should) apply equally regardless of the gender of the offender & victim.

And yes, I believe that women and men can have the same exact motivations for assault. And, regardless of the motivations, an adult in a position of power engaging in sexual activity of any kind with a minor over whom he/she has control is the same. The same whether man or woman.

Back to reality though, it’s not the first time that judges have gone easy on women accused of assaulting boys. Doesn’t make it right, but it’s obvious that personal biases come into play in situations like this.

Worried in,

Not so fast! Wisconsin code definitely does have gender references in a few assault laws from James E Doyle’s tenure. Ive run into them doing research mapping out all of the laws created since 1991-2 biennium.

One culpability test is the notion of PROVEABLE ” arousal” necessary for conviction of 941.01-02. Naturally women do not get readily observable biological traits like erection! This disadvantages men with respect to culpability. The federal rules on which constitutes ” sex assault of child” dramatically changed in 1968 OMNIBUS and there abouts.

Wait, what? Leave women off the registry??? Just curious, where is that stated?

Ahem, your misandry is showing…

Do you seriously believe women deserve some special treatment (i.e. “double standard”) in law? I hope you misspoke because that’s one seriously flawed position. If truly held, does this apply only to sexual crimes or are there other places where differing motivations should drive punishment? My getting a DUI because I’m too cheap to get a cab home is different than a woman who gets a DUI while trying to get home to see her kids? What got me into the car, impaired, has no bearing on my actions thereafter. Even assuming differing motivations, how does that matter compared to the black-and-white text of a law? Either you met the criteria, or you didn’t.

I would *love* to hear your thoughts on what the different motivations are for men and women regarding sexual assault. Last I checked, they both involve nature’s libido overriding society’s norms and laws.

Lastly: Equal Rights for Women also means Equal Responsibilities for Women.

While I recognize your right to opinion, In this case, you are sooooooo biased it is scary. So a woman can perform the same illegal acts, but suddenly equality is out the window? Suddenly the “weaker sex” gets a break? Then start paying them less, pull their right to vote, and keep them in the kitchen. If they aren’t held responsible for their actions, don’t give them the rights they fought for ( and that I support).

Wow! What a hypocrite you are! “So what if there is a double standard?” Seriously? You lost all credibility with such a statement. You may believe men have more evil motivations than women, but I don’t care how you spin it, what that woman did is no different than if a male teacher did the same thing. What’s your actual defense there? That the woman was motivated by love versus lust? Does that actually make it any less a crime?

Get out of here with that hypocritical nonsense.

@@ NPS
Could be, I guess. I remember when I was 16 and had sex with an older woman, it only lasted a few minutes and I never saw her again but she probably did love me.

Even if that were the case, does it make it less of a crime?

If I robbed a bank to feed my family should I get a lighter sentence than if i robbed the same bank to buy a new car? A spade is a spade.

@ Tim in WI: You wrote “If the genders & ages were reversed between the two, probation would’ve been prison.”.
How about if teacher and student were both males?? Then Prison, SOR, AND a high Statis-99 Risk Assessment result. 😒
Yes, notably more than a double standard. 😡

same thing here, they were lenient with me either bc of the relationship or the election, at first 50 years for the charges. The plea deal made my sentence 61 days in illinois or a year in jail to execute the sentence, executed it. a judge got voted out of office in 2008 elections, hes was in office a decade i think I heard, with a 99 some percent prosecution rate or something like that. the judge gave the whole prison deals except for a repetitive gun and violence charge. heard something about when they transfer they want to give clean books and empty jails, maybe same reason here. even an attempted murder charge a guy beat a elderly guy and left him in the desert to die , he got 15 days… good news tho he was bragging and the guys grandson just happened to be in the same block

WOW>>>>>>>> if this was a man he would be gone for years, or that judge would be recalled for the light sentence!!!!! I talked to a girl online I got 5 years in prison………

Mike R.
That is precisely why I know it is about the ” gov’t use” of the machine database and not as much about the dangers perceived by the people from known bad actors.. Some few wanted unfettered uses. Therefore it was necessary the grant states the right to indenture the human citizens to its maintenance. This clears feds to go farther still in it’s collateral application.

Thats the best part. The very second the sex offender was sold to big tech ,the rest of America’s citizenship was also sold out. Have you noticed the political right is complaining about big tech censorship? Now they are ( ultra right) are suing G**gle for Control on antitrust ground. HA HA HA! To late for that. That firm can operate anywhere it chooses and doesn’t need the US GOVT to be.

The ruling in this case is of keen interest to me on two levels: 1) The circular logical-double speak of the judge to declare that the person who is not a danger to society will be tarnished and punished for life on the registry fires up my fuel tanks even more than they were, which I didn’t deem possible; 2) I was a high school English teacher when my crime occurred. My gender is male and I dated a seventeen year old female student. The issue was not age, as she was of legal age in my former State. However, my role as an educator in the same district in which she was a student was at the crux of my conviction. Again, her age was not a discerning factor; had I been an educator in a different district from where she was a student, there would have been no crime committed regarding our relationship. That’s not my opinion, that’s pure fact. But, a crime was committed. I had never been at odds with the law and had a stellar twenty-year record as a teacher/coach. But, once the charges were formalized I became just another randy teacher whose existence was solely built upon my objective to groom victims. I took a plea deal and received a prison sentence of ten years suspended after three years; fifteen years of probation; and ten years on the registry. (My former State has a tiered system: ten years, twenty years, life.) I have little doubt that gender played a role in the overall sentencing, especially when I have examined a number of cases presided over by the same judge. In the end, my goal is to fight the injustices brought to all Registrants. However, it’s infuriating when the there is such a cavernous chasm between genders, regarding sentences. I have no ill-will towards the defendant in the case out of Illinois and wish her well towards reconstructing her life. Rulings like this one demonstrate the lunacy that we all face in trying to deconstruct senseless laws so that they can be replaced with reasonable justice. Thank you for listening (reading).

The judge’s determination that the defendant in this case is not a threat appears contrary to the legislature’s (politically motivated) determination that ALL individuals charged (not convicted, simply charged) with illegal sex acts are a graver threat to society than a nuclear attack. I’m surprised the state isn’t making a bigger deal out of this.

The gender difference is certainly clear. I’m sure the victim in this case is a victim only by legal definition. Likely, he was thrilled about the encounters, was praised by his friends, and certainly not “scarred for life” as victim advocates (who are/will be curiously silent on this particular case) would have people believe.

I think her sentence was perfectly appropriate, less inclusion on the registry which shouldn’t exist at all. I am still infuriated about men in similar circumstances – contact with willing though underage, POST-PUBESCENT partners – receive sentences that are grossly excessive. Absent violence or threats of it, confinement until a consenting “victim” reaches the age of consent is perfectly fair regardless of what parents think (speaking as a parent).

Apparently, the reasoning is that teenage boys are capable of deciding whether or not to have sex but teenage girls are not. I would think the women’s equality movement would have a problem with that line of thinking, but I’ve never seen any indication of it.

@Dustin, the reason why we even have such severe punishments for willing but underaged partners is partially because we have a whole lot of adult parents (and maybe some that aren’t parents) that simply don’t think that their child at that particular age could possibly have any sexual desires (even though at that age they probably did themselves) and thus must have been tricked or manipulated into a sexual act with an older person. In their eyes, this underaged person wasn’t capable or even ever thinking about having sex with anyone ever at all even someone of their own age. Purely from a criminal standpoint absent any registries, I think there still needs to be proper judgment calls made when prosecuting someone for sex crimes with willing underaged partners where the entire circumstances of the crime itself are fully considered. I don’t think for example an 18 year old with a perfectly willing 14 year old is the same thing as the 40 year old with a perfectly willing 14 year old most of the time but I often see them treated identically in terms of punishment. Maybe not everyone here agrees with this but that’s certainly what I think.

When it comes to this particular case it doesn’t make much sense that the Judge would call being on the registry punishment unless he is actually unfamiliar with the underlying case law (Smith V. Doe) that says it is not. In doing so the judge is actually making statements contrary to what a higher court has already ruled and he has no authority to actually state this unless he qualifies it with more information such as that the registry is not the same as it was when the case law was made. Otherwise, he is going to have his sentencing overturned on challenge, if challenged. If the State appeals because the punishment is lower than they wanted they will seize on those words saying that the Judge considered it punishment when in fact it is not and as such the defendant must have additional punishment beyond probation. I might be wrong but I otherwise don’t think it’s particularly useful as ammunition to get Smith v. Doe overturned. A Judge who didn’t do their homework about registry case law is not going to carry much if any weight in a higher court.

1) It was part of a plea agreement, so I don’t foresee an appeal.
2) The judge’s statement could reasonably be considered dicta and therefore not much to use for appeal.
3) If anyone were to use the judge’s words in an appeal, it would be the woman. Under his words, he gave her a lifetime sentence which could be deemed excessive. The State has no traction there be cause he applied the law.

A salient point regarding Smith v. Doe is that the Supreme Court did NOT find that sex offender registries are not punishment per se. It only found that Alaska’s implementation at the time did not constitute punishment. Since then, registry laws in various states have far exceeded those Alaska restrictions.

The Supreme Court did not determine when the line to punishment is crossed. It is a mistake both legally and tactically to capitulate to the characterization that registries are never punishment and always “rationally related” to a valid public safety measure. If we accept the never punishment meme, we will lose every time.


So, if the Judge himself says ““The public doesn’t need to be protected from her…”, then the purposes of her being required to register at the sex offender are, indeed, ENTIRELY punitive!

If a female sleeps with a 14 year old boy American Society eats it up like candy it’ll become a Lifetime movie or a crime series or a documentary called “sex lies and scandals” but If the situation was flipped and a male teacher was sleeping with the female student he would be label horrible monster a Predator manipulator narcissist a Satanist who is a threat to the community LMAO hypocrites

Good luck

I am thrilled at what the judge said about the registry being punishment.

But on the other hand if this were a male at this same age being the offender and he had a male or female victim we know he would have been sentenced to at least a decade in prison followed by some type of supervision.

Feminism goes out the window when it comes to sex crimes. Women can say a young boy looks cute and not a peep, while a guy could say the same to a young girl and he’s a creep. I know that genders aren’t equal biologically; yet they both are intimate human beings. Hypocrisy of the double standard of genders when it comes to sex in general. America the land of tyranny and run by insane self centered evil people. Good job Americans for looking out for future generations.

I’ll do you one better: try saying that a young boy is cute if you’re a man. I guarantee you, that is regarded most suspiciously of all.

I too am happy regarding the judge’s reference to punishment and the cognitive dissonance required to claim someone is no danger and then place them on the registry. That just points to the absurdity in these laws, and may be of some small help in future legal fights.

There is a definite gender bias in society and the law regarding sexuality. I disagree with any distinctions explicitly in the law or implicitly in sentencing. Even though this legal distinction isn’t rational, there is a reason for it and for it being nearly universal through history and across societies. I’m making this observation as someone who is trained neither in psychology nor anthropology. So I suggest more than a grain of salt.

When a woman becomes pregnant, how certain is she that the child is hers? A man’s certainty can not be complete but depends on trust or chastity belts. Evolutionary, everyone is concerned with sending their genes forward. From that standpoint, energy spent raising a child that is not yours is genetically wasted. So the tendency to accept—even encourage— promiscuity among men but to value female virginity and chastity is not entirely unreasonable.

Since I’ve seriously veered off topic, I’ll just say that we need to use our much vaunted forebrains to craft legal systems that value equality in justice over our monkey-brain emotional reactions.


Good, this is very good. A judge that actually called out what the SOR is. A scarlet letter, punishment, and an offender who is NOT a threat to society. This, may be, perhaps the only way to hasten the destruction of the SOR… out what the SOR is in their sentencing. If I were a judge, and I believed that a law was a direct violation of the constitution, but could not voice my opinion for fear of retaliation from the public, this is what I would do also. Perhaps this is a strategy that this judge, and maybe other judges will hopefully use going forward.

How horrible it is to have to have my entire career threatened for going against public opinion, for the greater good of the public. I couldn’t imagine what the judges, prosecutors, police, and attorneys had to go through in order to start eliminating the Jim Crow laws back in the day. Fear of losing their careers, fear of public retaliation, for their families and personal safety. Terrible !!

Regardless if you pee standing up or sitting down we all should unite together. If we can’t support each other we don’t have a pot to piss in.

We of us can come together, but we can also get to our truth out. Women they are no are not as dangerous. Point to me out where a woman has, on her own, commit a kidnap sex assault murderr. I dont even remember reading of a woman ever being a cannibal. Men, on the other story…..

While I didn’t really want to comment on this article here goes.With this little article about this lady being ostrisize with this registry label it seems everybody on here wants to be the next Clarence Darrow in this monkey trial. One wonders were the data is on that?

Is this registry a men’s and boys club of punitive danage as David said or rotten tomattoes as your computer jargon goes. One even wonders if they even thought of a computer in “Death of a salesman or To kill a mockingbird. One wonders if the old saying “you reap what you sow” means anything today in this boys and girls club to catch a predator or who is perverting justice.

Now so far on here we haven’t heard from a woman’s view on this but I’m sure any mother wouldn’t approve of their daughter doing this or the mother of the boy wanting to sue the school. See when money is involved it changes the whole game in many ways. Even David with his punitive view is a bit dense. So who is abusing who in this tabloid news of shaming.
Hey does anyone see the main point of this whole issue. She confessed. In other words she fessed up to her wrong doing which was the right thing to do or are women just as bad as men.

While this is one form of a registry were the roles are reversed and the women is the agressor and not the man, is one back to square one in this registry type of justice or injustice as some on here view.

Yes this ordeal was a physical encounter. So are their more physical encounters in this sex registry than verbal internet encounters. Even ships warn other ships before they bomb them or who deceives who in much of these encounters and yes we all have laws and truth but who know’sthe though and intent of another. Look that up in yoru computer “Bible”i’m sure you”ll find the answer.

Now Janice has given this unusual example of this girl and the question is or should be who is abusing who or who is trying to cover up.

I’M a hypocrite because of the double standard? Oh really! It’s because of the “one size fits all approach” that has everyone in a mess to begin with! You don’t think there should be different standards that everyone should be individually assessed? You want to look at a hypocrite, take a long look in the mirror.

Yes I have some misandry because over the past 8 years I have been reading and commenting to this site, I’ve seen a heck of a lot of misogyny. So much that other female RCs were chased away from this forum due to one individual’s comment about how she was worse because she was a female. I’ve read a lot of hate towards women about the implementation of the registry. Yet you all forget WHO ARE THE ONES FIGHTING THE REGISTRY? Women are. I make no apologies for my statements and I stand by them.

As for your incorrect conclusions about my convictions, you have no idea what it entailed or what my status was. Yes I am female. Yes, I had to register. I was also NEVER publicly listed. I also have an expunged misdemeanor, and I was removed from the registry two weeks ago! So there really is no reason for me to make an excuse. Likewise, NOT ONCE had I ever judged anyone for their offenses. EVER.

My interest is in helping other women who are on the registry. Plenty of folks on here have a specific focus. Some focus on juveniles on the registry. Some focus on those with expunged records. Others focus on people with non-contact offenses. So how is my focus on helping women so bad.

If you think I’ve lost all credibility, fine, I don’t need to come back on here. I have already been relieved of the duty to register. I’m no longer an RC. However, I had refused to be one of those to just turn my back on those who are still struggling. But if that’s how you all feel about my opinion and my focus, then there’s no reason for me to make any more efforts to end the registry. You’re on your own.

You’re lashing out due to feeling attacked but you are being hypocritical and creating an unnecessary double standard. Now you’re trying to play the victim and creating this strawman argument saying we’re being misogynistic which is ridiculous.

We simply don’t agree with your hypocritical statements and calling you out for trying to excuse yourself while condemning others based solely gender. And saying “we’re on our own” is also ridiculous considering this site. Try and think about this next time.

I think what set most people off was what appeared to be a statement that women should be treated differently than men, even if the facts of the case are the same–that would be a double standard. Nobody is saying there shouldn’t be individualized assessment–which one be a *single, uniform* standard. The phrase “double standard” typically carries the meaning of, “for thee but not for me.” The problem isn’t that there is or isn’t a double standard, the problem is there are *zero* standards. I take that back, the “standard” is whatever the crony DA, who probably golfs on Fridays with the judge, decides that day.

P.S. Congrats on your removal! One less burdened citizen is always a good thing to hear.

My two cents on an assessment standard – A comprehensive individualized assessment using multiple assessing methods creating one large overall assessment needs to be used as a standed. Hell, if it was put together and accredited by a reputable (or more than one) entity, then put that baby to use pronto.

I had one assessment in fall 2010 and then again in late summer 2017, comprehensively administered by two different highly respected individuals in their psychiatric fields across multiple assessing vehicles, where both concluded the same – no risk (Hansen’s Static-99 test said low risk because I am an alive walking talking breathing white male middle aged individual but we all know about his system through various discussions here already, but his was only one of many assessments involved).


You may not be an RC today, but you could be one tomorrow, again.

If the feds have their way, your state approved removal will mean nothing. Many across the country have been extended or added back to the registry after removal based on a simple change in law/rules.

The direction this discussion has taken is totally counterproductive. There is absolutely no sense in picking at one another. We all know that the legal system is in large measure random and capricious. We draw judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys essentially out of a hat. The woman in this article may have gotten a lesser sentence because she is a woman or because the judge had a satisfying lunch. If there is a gender disparity, that data might ultimately be useful in an equal protection argument, much as how racial disparity data are stimulating changes today.

NPS, I applaud you for your efforts to help registered women and to fight registration in general–particularly because it no longer affects you personally. Every little bit helps. Speaking of that, I presume everyone here sent their comments regarding the proposed DOJ rule. So much in these forums involves whining or airing of personal grievances, not in discussing ideas to redirect the social and judicial juggernaut incrementally, and certainly not in taking unified action. We need to stay focused on the real enemy, i.e. the lunacy around sex offense laws, and the registry. To quote Forrest Gump, “that’s all I have to say about that.”


@Ed C has it right, internal fighting is counterproductive here.

My two cents on this – if this article had been written genderless of who was convicted and their parenting title, then we all would have said the laudatory things about the judge (as some have). There may have been wondering about the gender of the person convicted possibly leading into double standards, etc being discussed. But the point being as has been said here, the system does not equally apply, which we all know, when we all want it to, e.g. Equal Protection Clause under the law, DAs/Judges being discretionary, fair and unbiased, etc. However, no two cases are the same and should be weighed individually, not just based upon the offense being alleged. If the latter was the way, then rubber stamp them all in a line w/o due process. To the Gulag! I’d rather take my chances individually.

In the end, we can only speculate what a young father of two would’ve had happen to them in this situation, e.g. maybe harsher, maybe the same if similar conditions were at hand. Maybe the judge did see the good overall in her after a good lunch that day (or was feeling good after a hole in one the previous day in a late afternoon golf game or for whatever reason). Who knows. We need to stick with the fact the Judge recognized the obvious – the registry is punishment – and laud that fact. The young lady will have the internet to remind her of this for the rest of her days (and her children’s days too don’t forget), maybe even infinity as long as the news website keeps it on the server.

@NPS – keep up the good fight here for whoever you want. Rather you be on this side of the line than the other side, especially with what could be coming as @JDUtah said about what is currently in review by the USAG.

I am going to add to my comment that I witnessed in person a Judge who was more lenient on a person who was up for a traffic charge because they dressed respectfully and was respectful towards the Judge when speaking. Judges do have discretionary power they can use, as we have seen, in helping people with their offense. Unfortunately, they are few and far between when we continually see some hammer down on people who don’t deserve it (which is not everyone).

Don’t let these bitter people discouraged you everybody in America are entitled to their own opinion 75% of the people on here are teir3 sex offenders they’re very angry and bitter and dont want to see anyone go free because misery loves company they literally despise any registrant who has been relieved of their duty to register or will be relieved of their duty to register because they are lifers labeled SVP’S and I truly feel sorry for them .

Good luck

That’s ridiculous, people are reacting to her using gender as a sole basis of discrimination on the registry. This has nothing to do with being bitter, if anything based on your previous comments you are projecting here.
It’s absurd for you to try to invalidate a legitimate reaction to her hypocritical statements by claiming jealousy. I’m not on public site either and will be Tier 1. This has nothing to do with jealousy and everything to do with keeping a united front, not dividing by make exceptions based solely on gender.

Please actually think about what you’re saying before you write again.

@dm & Aero

The other issue is dividing across “Tier” lines. Aero has a habit of disparaging those “Tier 3” guys. Fact is Aero is just and legislative change away from being a “Tier 3” RC himself if a legislator/agency feels his offence should be Tier 3. Fact is your label of sex offender is the same as everyone else.

Are u trying to convince me or yourself that that every sex offender is the same.
Don’t get mad at me Im not the one who created the designated tier levels that separates sex offenders based on the type of crimes they committed

Good luck

I have no idea what AERO1 did or didn’t do. Don’t care.

I do know that most “people” who disparage any “sex offenders” are not as good or decent as the people they disparage. That I know. I’ve seen a lot of those harassers. I will judge and condemn anyone who thinks Registries are acceptable and know they are a lesser person than almost all People Forced to Register.

I won’t wish those “people” “good luck”. I’ll wish them what they deserve. And in reality, I’ll continue to deliver it.

@JohnDoeUtah….Aero1 sounds very much like another holier than thou former contributor on this forum who shall remain nameless. I agree with you though about the razor’s edge we are all walking right now. Any thoughts or opinions about a Trump loss? I ask because Bill Barr will be the first head on the chopping block in that event. He’s widely hated by democrats and he’s obviously unpopular with our particular demographic. Is there anyway this federal SORNA could be defeated or reversed if Barr is gone?


Honestly, I think we would be remiss to think that the new Proposed SORNA Rule is being driven by Barr himself. Yes, he is the USAG and will likely sign off on it, but I am sure it is being driven by lower-level career personnel, likely the SMART Office. So, a regime change could have little effect. Also, let’s not forget that Biden sponsored the AWA in the Senate in 2006, his statements on the floor of the Senate are what you would expect.

I think the only viable way forward is to repeat the formula in Does v. Snyder and attack the “rational relation” prong of the Kennedy factors. The Court stated we have the burden of the “clearest proof” to show that the law is punitive, and thus cannot be applied retroactively. However, that does little or those convicted after its passage. I think it will eventually be melded and recognized as part of the punishment for conviction.

Please don’t speak for me or anyone else participating in this conversation. You have no idea what is in someone else’s head as he/she speaks, and you have no idea what someone else’s motivation is.

Speak for yourself all day long, but don’t presume to know why someone else made a statement.

@ dm and all you guys chill out a bit thats enough ok or did many think before one got involved or even texted or send dirty pictures in all this? So who’s trying who’s spirit. Theirs your if a man thinkest senerio. NPS I’m glad you came out of the woods to speak up. Yes women are saved in childbirth. In a way one could say is this whole registry a double standard. Is it really a double standard or would one want to actually say who’s putting who in double jeapordy in many cases.

Actually since Janice brought this article to our attention there is something positive in this article that some should understand. I know this one size fits all seems to be the norm on here but we all have a thorn in the flesh as pointed out on here or whos’ playing with dolls.

NPS you are right and yes many can use a hypocrite stance of many that view women but the word hypocrite was used to say to authorities they are a bit above teaching with their double standards or double talk and thus…. I’m only doing my job. Sure one can get involved in much of this registry but how does this double standard show love in many of these situations of a deceptive nature. Yes we can all get stressed out and yes many are stressed out Even many on here couldn’t get or comprend the main point that she ( this lady) fessed up and told the truth which is commendable.

This women didn’t kill anyone as a Bonnie parker or Clyde duo in this virginity robbery if one may say that. Myself its even hard for me at times to understand many of these views on here and their is nothing wrong with a bit of christian understanding and yes forgiveness goes a long ways in this tresspassing endeavor in many of these vain operations.

I’ve even given a glimps of my story in text on here to help encourage others to take a stand and yes I have been slapped on the right cheek but we are to turn the other cheek. See we don’t wrestle with flesh and blood but against rulers, against authorities and the powers of this dark world and were are the principals in this one size fits all when that judge could be just as guilty. One even wonders about law today or is American justice getting so preverted that men and women don’t get a fair trial and most wind- up with a plea deal.

So why a plea deal? Usually they don’t have enough evidence in much of this cover up type of corruption. One even wonders who in power said.. Nobody tells me what to do? And Janice let me know if I’m wrong on this one. Remember everything has to be wittnessed by two or more, so what does that say about internet misgivings or how many go back and ask for a retrial, a redress of grivances or an appeal in many of these injustices. And yes its pretty tough to be your own lawyer when the procsecution labels you a tongue bearer of sexual language. Even ladies showing their undergarments may be some type of inducement to put one on the registry or probation. If sin is a sin than we are all guilty

One gets to the point where many at time doesn’t understand anything in this Valley of the Dolls jive talk’in “head games” in this liberty and justice for all.

You have no idea whats in a persons mind? Your right on that one worried. Seems we are all worried or did we all get a fair shake in all this registry ordeal. So worried who’s doing the evil in all these registry matter issues? So what is evil? This gal taking advantage of a 14 yr old or the woman taking the sexual liberties that had a different turn of events in her whole ordeal with this registry type involvement.

Sure one can get sour notes in life and try to out think the best or other person but things can get out of hand just like these devious sex registry schemes go. Are authorities playing a new game in this deceptive way. Sure each and every one of you on here should count your lucky stars just like this girl as it could of been worse. Thats why many of these registry ordeals should be put to a stop. Yes the heart is evil or who is inducing the evil in many ways. So we press on to help others and strive to eradicate much of this registry. Advocacy is good when the intent is good. So in many ways who is promoting the evil.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x