ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (04/16 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings




CT: Committee Considers Sex Offender Registry Changes

Source: 8/24/21

A subcommittee of the state Sentencing Commission is working to create a process to allow certain individuals to be removed from the public sex offender registry.

After at least two attempts to reshape the law regarding people who have committed sex offenses, the General Assembly’s Incarceration and Collateral Consequences of Criminal Conviction Subcommittee will hear a presentation Thursday on two narrow proposals to create a path for people to get off the registry.

The proposals are in their infancy and likely will be altered several times before they go before the entire commission, said Alex Tsarkov, executive director of the Sentencing Commission. “We’ve been trying to do this for a very long time. It’s a tough topic to work with.”

It’s a safety issue that is playing out as a political issue, said Amber Vlangas, executive director of the Restorative Action Alliance, which advocates for victims of sexual violence and those who have been subject to “state violence” through probation and parole policies after conviction.

“We believe this perpetuates the cycle of violence,” Vlangas said of sex offender registries.

The registries create shame, isolation, and an inability for people to meet their economic needs which in turn creates instability and a greater possibility of reoffending, Vlangas said.

“What is going to make people safe? Stability,” said Vlangas, who is a victim of military sexual assault and married to someone who is on Connecticut’s registry. “We are in full support of providing a path off of the registries.”

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

Sounds like the registry is getting to big to manage in Connecticut too. The proposals are still in their infancy and will be altered 3-4 times before they go before the entire commission, California did this same song and dance for years before passing SB384.
It’s a tough issue for politicians they don’t wanna ruin their political careers by coming off as easy on sex offenders.
Today I read an article called the murder of Megan kank and Jessica Lunsford iv always heard their names but iv never took the time to actually read the details of their cases, after reading about what happened to them it’s obvious were all suffering and being punished for what these 2 psychopaths did.
In my opinion only tier 3 offenders should be publicly posted on the registry for life and tier 1-2 offenders should only be publicly listed while on probation or parole and after 10-20 years be relieved of their duty to register

Good luck

And what do you propose to be a tier 3? I’ve seen you mention this exact same thing before. Just curious.

SVP’s and anyone with crimes involving children under the age of 13

Good luck

That’s pretty arbitrary. So someone guilty of CP possession that had someone under 13 should be lifetime? What about that 7-year-old in NY who’s currently being prosecuted for “rape”?

I think you meant to say tier 3’s who were placed there after individual evaluation, right?

You have to remeber guys like him always think about themselves and ignore the fact people are are labeled SVP and tier III based on age of victim alone and not because they’re anymore dangerous that the other tiers. So do something to a 14 year old and youre “just a tier II, not dangerous and can potentially be off the registry in a number of years, but if said victim is 13 or below, youre a SVP and dangerous to the public and on the registry for life even though the crimes are identical. It makes absolutely zero sense. I cant believe he thinks something so backwards is ok.

It doesn’t matter if the criminal regimes could figure out who is really “tier 3” and who isn’t. The Oppression Lists aren’t useful, aren’t needed, increase crime, kill remorse, empathy, and compassion, and they make PFRs really want to commit crimes and hurt people.

It’s obvious. But most people “think” with their emotions instead of their brains.

No, no one should be listed for life. Too many are on tier 3 for things that were never a danger to the public, the public regularly misuses the registry, and a noncontact non violent offense should never be listed for life due to the fact that said person is NO danger to society. If a registry must exist, it should be for a finite time and law enforcement only.

All intelligent, moral, informed people agree with you.

Not only that, but its asinine to label one a tier III or SVP when theyve been out of prison a decade or more and possibly are married and have children of their own whom they raise.

Seriously Aero?? I’m a tier 3 in Michigan, placed on the registry AFTER it was created and had my original 25 years extended to life in 2011 with NO assessment of danger for a crime that was consensual. But I’ve already talked about that before.
Registries should not exist at all, but if they do, the only people who should be on them are people who support them.
Don’t be quick to judge people you do not know.

Don’t worry about the troll. He shouldn’t even be on here.

I’ve asked him numerous times to explain how he fantasizes the Oppression Lists (OLs) are useful, but like all the other harassers, he’s not able to say anything intelligent. The OLs just make “people” like feel good. That’s the end of it.

The only “people” who should be listed on OLs are the scumbags that support them.

Or the scumbags that say being on the registry sucks, but once I’m off the registry I’ll use it to protect my children. People with victim under 13 are tier 3, so two young ones engaged in doctor are dangerous. Sounds like those with that logic need to look in the mirror and lay on the couch talking to a shrink. Some nuts are lose in their brain, so seek help.

Yep. But if a person thinks the Oppression Lists (OLs) are useful, why would they wait until “I’m off the registry” to use it? They should be using it today. I know the criminal regime of CA says it is illegal for a PFR to look at the OLs, but f*** them every day. If I thought the OLs were useful to protect my family, I’d use them.

Speaking of which, I’ve known about the OLs for decades and I’ve never used them one single time for anything related to public safety or trying to protect my children. Probably because I’ve always been a good, responsible, intelligent parent. The OLs are nonsense. I treat all people as if they are listed on the OLs.

What are the OLs useful for? The best use I’ve found is to identify aholes that I need to keep away from my family. But another great use would be to find terrible parents. Big government should ask parents to rank how much they think the OLs protect their family and if they rank it too high, they should open a case with DFACs to investigate removing all children from their home. That would be a way OLs could actually protect children. They could find a lot of dangerous parents that way.

BTW, I’m still waiting for any big government lover on here to tell us all how they fantasize the OLs help protect anyone. I guess they can’t.

You much be a tier 2 that’s why you’re saying that. What a [MODERATOR’S NOTE: NO PERSONAL INSULTS TO EACH OTHER!]

While this is really encouraging, it’s a shame that even in the People’s Republic of Connecticut (where stores and restaurants can’t give you disposable bags or straws) this is, at best, a moderately possible change 2-3 years out. Connecticut already has far fewer registrants publicly listed, per capita, than most states. There is such little political willpower for minor changes even in “far left”states.

If someone has been living a law abiding life for years they shouldn’t be on a registry. For those that believe if it benefits me they need a good kick in the Pants.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x