CASOMB Sept 2021 Reports Changes in Registrant Community, Discusses Additional Counseling Requirement

Source: ACSOL

The California Sex Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB), during its monthly meeting today, reported several changes in the registrant community.  Among those changes is a slight increase in the total number of registrants, from 108,106 in February 2021 to 108,162 in August 2021.  Of that total, there was also a slight increase in the number of registrants not in custody.  That number was 83,201 in August 2021 as compared to 82,526 in February 2021.  The number of homeless registrants decreased from 6,994 in February 2021 to 6,976 in August 2021.  There were 18,816 registrants in violation for failure to update their registration in August 2021 as compared to 18,565 in February 2021.

“It is important to note that although the total number of registrants increased slightly, the number of registrants who are homeless registrants decreased,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “It is also important to note that the number of registrants who have failed to register has increased.”

Also during today’s CASOMB meeting, it was reported that there were 7,052 registrants required to wear a GPS device in August 2021.  This compares to 7,263 registrants required to wear a GPS device in February 2021.  All registrants while on parole are required to wear a GPS device for 24 hours a day and to recharge the devices twice each day.

Absent from today’s meeting was any discussion of the Tiered Registry Law, including the petition process which began on July 1, 2021.

“CASOMB is doing a disservice to the public by failing to address implementation of the Tiered Registry Law,” stated Bellucci.  “This is particularly true since CASOMB supported passage of that law.”

Further, during today’s meeting CASOMB board members discussed Assembly Bill 1950 which became law in September 2020.  The new law, which is retroactive, reduces probation terms for most, but not all, people convicted of a felony from 5 years to 2 years and for people convicted of a misdemeanor from 3 years to 1 year.  Although individuals convicted of a sex offense are not categorically excluded from these reductions, excluded individuals include those convicted of a violent felony as well as those convicted of  “annoy or molest” a child.

The CASOMB board members today discussed the possibility of new legislation that would require registrants on probation, including those convicted of PC 314 (indecent exposure), to continue probation beyond these time limits in order to require them to participate in additional counseling.  The board did not formally adopt this position, but instead referred it to an existing CASOMB working group.

Before its passage, AB 1950 was supported by the state’s public defenders and opposed by the state’s district attorneys.

Related posts

Notify of

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 and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Can someone tell San Diego County probation that AB 1950 is retroactive, doesn’t require court approval, etc? While others I know have been released due to it, I keep getting told that it requires court approval, etc. despite being the perfect person on probation, completing therapy, meeting legal requirements of nonviolent or serious felony, and so on. I’m now 60 days past what was supposed to be the release due to 1950…

What bothers me most about this additional counseling is that it’s seemingly meaningless since it in no way affects you being able get off the registry, especially those in Tier 3. The path off is purely static. Even worse, is that it’s meaningless in the face of that BS Static-99 that can automatically force someone into Tier 3. The lazy “test” 100% overrides the years of actual counseling. You can do everything perfectly and get a glowing exit report from the people that have spent time with you working on this at least once a week, and it amounts to absolute ZERO where it matters to a person being able to regain their life.

If you comply and properly complete counseling, you should be able to end registration with the ending of your probation/parole. Period. If that was a thing, I guarantee far more people would be much more willing to actually embrace the process.

Lemme guess CA defines not in custody as not in physical custody behind bars, but anything other than that is not in custody, e.g. parole, probation, registry?

Did CASOMB explain their position behind this: “The CASOMB board members today discussed the possibility of new legislation that would require registrants on probation, including those convicted of PC 314 (indecent exposure), to continue probation beyond these limits in order to require additional counseling.” Was there any talk of any further assessments required to say whether additional counseling was needed?

Is this the same CASOMB that supports bullshit like the polygraph test, aka the “lie detector,” and the STATIC 99 scams?

My brain automatically tunes out any fake claims, representations, and “statistics” from fake government organizations like CASOMB.

Although the registry increased slightly, I wonder how many registrants were able to get off the registry via the CoR? Reading on here, there seemed to be quite a few who were relieved from registering.

I know the net is a slight increase, but for those who earned the CoR had to wait a minimum of 10 years to apply for it.

Thanks for posting this. The State Board should include at least one RSO!

Do you trust CASOMB-certified “treatment” programs to determine if someone should be able to petition off the registry?

From my experience, one could have perfect attendance, be always on time, have good participation, do any and everything asked from these bogus sex offender treatment programs, as well as your P.O., and follow all your conditions to a T, and the “therapists” and “psychologists” will always find something to write on your record to “cover their asses.” Those records could then come back to bite someone trying to petition off the registry, if we had a system like this.

The CASOMB-certified treatment programs are 110% corrupt and are not to be trusted. They are a formality required to get off of probation, parole, or PRCS. While it is great that perhaps people walk away from these programs having learned useful coping and life skills, despite being put through the wringer of having your confidential psychological details aired out in “containment meetings,” and having to go through polygraph tests, these programs are absolutely not your friend — and I think it would be a terrible idea to rely on them as a determinant to whether someone can petition off the registry. The goal of corrupt sex offender treatment programs is for-profit. Pure and simple $$$.

For example, in my treatment group, everyone that was discharged never received a “completion certificate,” despite the fact everyone that discharged, while I was in the group, demanded one. Apparently, the standard for actually attaining a completion certificate is not humanly possible. In the treatment group I was in, NONE of us were violated, we were either retired or had some sort of job, and we all had housing. Most of us were first-time offenders. Again, no one was issued a completion certificate. No one. Nada.

Also, do people on probation, out of their pocket, not have to pay for these so-called “counseling” programs? Seems like CASOMB might be in cahoots to churn out more business for the cottage industry of sex offender treatment.

If we’ve learned anything from our experiences through the “justice” system, and watching how our government has dealt with crisis in the past year, we should all learn that we have a corrupt “government,” full of incompetent — and heartless — people running it.

Last edited 2 years ago by Ed

I never been to any type of sex offender treatment program so I wouldn’t know but people new to the registry will probably have to attend these sick and degrading sex offender treatment programs,
Kamala Harris said California was the steering wheel of this country
If you can change legislation here you can change legislation across the whole country.
I guess the million dollar question is how far are people forced to register willing to go for their freedom.

Good luck

Guess I am forgetting my therapy classes or treatment program which was several years ago and even the way they booted me out of the class when they wanted me to take the class again. Now I don’t know much about California but it was part of Mexico from what history says, In the gold rush days it became a state and now its the registry rush for many to capitalize in many ways if one likes to say that. Is government unbalanced?

Basically all and much of this registry is a stumbling block. The classes, the treatment, the fear factor, and even the controlling. So who’s putting their faith in mankind’s government of principal. Using sex as bait like dangling a carrot in front of another. Is perverting to prevent like a leading type of witness. What government would give such perversion to snare an entrap another.

Even this barbaric leg monitoring is a cash cow of a controlling factor,or should mankind have better understanding about this CASOMB or any other organization whether it be in New York, Florida or any other state. Wow seems mankind is fighting crime by instilling or inducing on another. Many don’t even know why this Covid-19 is here. Does mankind show mercy in this registry? Who is doing the debauchery in this word game or even presenting this on mankind. That’s no way to protect and serve. Its going against the grain. Talk about abusive government…..

It amazes me how many are wearing ankle bracelets. No way to describe the disposition other than to say Gov is routinely utilizing continuous electronic search upon the people. My research indicates the device(s) operate(s) @ a ping every half second or 90-120 x min. The general use and application is determined by statutes. The interpretation of WI law involved in who does and doesn’t meet criteria is in question here in WI.
Naturally our current AG interprets a broader application than was recognized by the last AG & DOC administration. Fact is there are tech firm contracts at stake so essentially the broader application equates directly to a larger contract. States lease the devices from the firm but it is the firm that operates the rest of the proprietary system, all of which is database driven. This is evidence of electronic imperialism.

Need help? I pled no contest too a misdemeanor charge of indecent exposure in 2004 and never went to jail for it. I had too register while i was on probation. I completed probation moved back home in 2006 where i wasnt required too register. Fast forward too 2020 I got convicted of a domestic in california with an ex and I had too do 18 months and was recently released on parole. The parole department here has made me register again for that 2004 misdemeanor and are forcing me too take sex offender treatment and be put on gps, even though back in 2004 I was not required too take sex offender treatment by the judge or probation and this new case im currently on the judge never said I was required too take sex offender treatment or be on gps eitheir . I was unaware that I was tier 1 and had done more than the required time too be taken off the 290 registry under that ab 384. I heard there is case law that the parole department cant make me do sex offender treatment under People V Douglas 2013. since my case was so old. Just needing some help and direction in addressing these issues. Thank you

So whats legal in this CSOMB out in California or this modification of justification? Sure mankind doesn’t have all the answers in this punishment phase or vain gallantry if one may say. Does one go with basic instinct or human instinct or who’s taking things out of character today. Was the Atomic Bomb taken out of character to win a war? or was it pride in someone’s vain thinking.
Was the murder of Martin Luther some safety factor to ride Civil rights. Sure I will admit that California is a wonderful state but has true justice taken a backseat to many other states with some electronic monitoring or a change in some half time score of a football team to win over all.
So were does that leave justice when the rules change in this registry ordeal. Fighting for justice is as true as the American Revolution.