ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (10/16 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

We have emailed a link to the conference videos to all attendees and those who purchased the videos. If you haven’t received it and it is not in your spam folder, email

conference at all4consolaws dot org

 

ACSOL News

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.

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.  
 
Subscribe
Notify of
18 Comments
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.

SR….you must have been listening in on my group counseling sessions. I have been singing this same song for the past five years to ‘therapists’ and probation officers and even a couple of polygraphers along the way. Our Kafka-esque lives define all that is futility.

I now have about 75 days left on paper and I seriously contemplate moving out of country once ‘free’ (as if one placed onto Tier 3 could ever consider themself “free”). I wish there was some reasonable path forward wherein I could re-capture just a modicum of my former life, but I am a realist and I do not see any such path materializing in my lifetime, and as I have only so many years left (I’m over the age of 70 now), I think I’ll find some warm beach in some tropical land, and forget about the rest. Or I can stay here and fight the good fight, seeking justice incrementally, knowing any meaningful reform may still be decades away. We’ll soon see.

@SG, I know how you feel. The problem is that there is no guaranteed safe place forever. Consider how many registrants had a big surprise when Mexico suddenly decided to kick out registrants! All the money and time they spent setting up their nest disappeared. Country after country is catching the hysteria.

So I stay here, fighting for registrant rights. We have made a lot of progress.

Whatever you choose, I encourage you to stay in the fight.

SG, I wish there were a foreign beach that would take me; I haven’t found one yet. At least, not for longer than ninety days on a tourist visa and that’s only in Europe. Best of luck finding that place!

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?

No, there was no talk of any further assessments that would be required to retain a registrant on probation. Instead, that discussion was slated for a future committee meeting. This is something we will need to stop when it is included in legislation.

Wait. I thought Probation/Parole was part of the punishment/sentence. How can this not be a violation of Ex Post? They are retroactively increasing punishment at the stroke of a pen with no input from the judge and no chance to appeal. I am referring the the part about “extending probation/parole beyond statutory limits in order to require additional counseling”. I see its not there right now, but they are considering such legislation and we all know its pretty bloody likely that if they draft that legislation it will sail through committee and voting.

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.

I filed a COR in OC 10 years ago! The DA was nuts / lied/made a scene. It was a circus. The Judge almost ruled in my favor! I filed one this year before the July 1st deadline! I never saw the zjudge/DA granted! Received the document via the court 10 days thereafter and I received a document via the DOJ 10 days later informing /conforming I was off the registry. Good luck

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 1 month ago by Ed

When I went, I had to pay for the counseling. Although, I did get a certificate of completion. It’s one of the requirements if one wanted to earn a 1203.4, iirc.

Given fees are mandatory to offset state’s cost a civil claim is available in the appropriate jurisdiction. Don’t sue the state, sue the treatment providers or programs. On parole in halfway house I filed a police report upon the demanded overloading of clients above capacity into a van to do mandated physical activity off site. The provider had a fit! They tried their best to dissuade a formal complaint before the cops finally came. They called my P.O.. They even cut off my phone privileges and attempted to deny by silence where the i was. Another con client came upstairs and told me the cops were downstairs asking about me. The elevator was controlled by staff, so i used a window. After I filed that complaint about the van deal, the providers faced more scrutiny for housing sex offenders next door to a grade school which I’d never pointed out to cops though I knew it. The others in the house elected me President of that bunch per the rules of the game the providers themselves had set up.

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.

18
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.