ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (11/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings



CO: Proposal to change ‘Sex Offender’ terminology in Colorado, Springs District Attorney testifying against change

Source: 11/15/21

According to a draft sent to 11 News from the Sex Offender Advisory Board, it would change the term of ‘sex offender’ to ‘those who have been sexually abusive’.

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (KKTV) – The Sex Offender Management Board has voted to make changes in their terminology in how they label sex offenders.

According to Board Chair Kimberly Kline, the Board feels the change is needed after seeing a negative trend with rehabilitation for treatment with sex offenders. According to a draft sent to 11 News from the Board, it would change the term of ‘sex offender’ to ‘those who have been sexually abusive’. The Board believes that changing terminology will reduce risks and re-offending.

“Ultimately, it is about risk reduction,” said Kline. “When we are talking about risk reduction, we are talking about reducing recidivism or re-offense. If we are doing that, it is coming from a very victim centered standpoint. I think everybody can get behind that.”

District Attorney Michael Allen of Colorado Springs is against the proposal and believes the language should not be changed. In a press conference today, Allen says that taking away the label of sex offender is taking away from the crime that they committed with the victim.

“Words have meaning and actions have consequences,” said Allen. “Using the term sex offender recognizes the gravity of deviant sexual behavior committed against another person. This propose change diminishes the harm done to victims of sex offenders.”

Read the full article


Amid Criticisms A Sex Crimes Registry Is ‘Overly Harsh,’ Colorado Rebrands The Term ‘Sex Offender’ (Source: 11/20/21)

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

But not all people on these damn lists should be called or classified as a sex offender. Not everyone is guilty not all crimes are Legit or fairly Prosecuted. Only violent and repeat offenders should be on the list and not your charge just because your charge may say one thing it should go by your case not by what they charge you with. Also When the state of Texas gives you a deferred adjudication and says that you have never been convicted of the crime if you Successfully complete probation.Then why am I being punished as the same as everyone else that has been convicted of the crime?

@MrCEO. I am in the same boat as you. Texas. Completed deferred. No convictiom. Lifetime registration. Absolute B.S.

I swear the US is finished with fools like him. Only an idiot thinks it’s OK to label one for the rest of their life for one mistake, and only people involved in sexual crimes at that….

I think most prosecutors are mentally unstable. Walking garbage.


Don’t insult garbage.

Not all cases involve abuse by the person registering let alone direct contact. Not every case includes sexual activity. No term will be a one size fits all solution. What about cases where the registrant was their own victim? Tons of scenarios don’t fit the box law enforcement and victims advocates wish to place everyone in.

In Texas, one can be on the sex registry and be required to attend treatment if one breaks into a residence where someone is home.

This happened to a guy in one of my treatment groups. The treatment provider stated this guy had passed all his polygraphs and was telling the truth he had never committed any sexual crimes.

This guy stated for a living he burglarizes apartments during the daytime in a nice section of the city when people are at work. And one day he broke into an apartment not knowing anyone was home and saw an adult female so he got out of there as fast as he could but not before being captured on video and that he never touched the lady. The treatment provider stated that what this guy stated was the truth as this guy passed a polygraph over the incident and in the polygraph was also asked if he had any intention of breaking into a residence with the intent to sexually assault a person. No intent. Just a burglary where someone happened to be home.

And in Texas, if one is not the parent, one can be put on the sex registry if one kidnaps a minor, even if there is absolutely no sexual crime committed and no intent to commit a sexual crime.

And as stated by two Texans above, in Texas if one’s charge is dismissed, one can still be required to be on the registry. I know as I also fall into this category.

Interesting information and thanks for sharing. Would just like to add:

Those crimes you mentioned are much, much more dangerous than plenty of sex crimes. They’ve resulted in people being murdered, of course.

If the Sex Offense Registries (OLs) are useful and “make sense” then we certainly should be Registering all people who break into homes. I don’t really care what their intent is. We certainly should be Registering people who kidnap, shoot people, punch people in the face, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. All of that is extremely dangerous, causes similar harm (as sex offenses) and more, has much higher recidivism, etc.

Also, if “treatment” is required for “sex offenders” then I definitely do not understand why it is not required for people who commit all of those crimes. As a father, husband, and just a human, I’m more worried about almost all of those crimes against my family than I am sex crimes. I’m barely concerned at all about child sex crimes, because I actually supervise, educate, and stay engaged with my children (i.e. I’m a good parent).

The fact that we don’t Register all those other crimes is proof that the OLs are nonsense. The liars are lying when they say the OLs are for public safety or protecting children. The OLs exist to placate Karens.

Polygraphs don’t work and prove nothing.

I’ll just add that the reCAPTCHA for this comment made me say that a farm combine is a tractor and that is wrong. I’m not a robot, they are!

This is all a joke as none of these people have a clue as how to fix a worthless registry. They are grabbing for straws and wasting tax payer money. The fix is to eliminate the registry it is the “enron” of legislation.

The registry will not go away till the babyboomers are out of office pure and simple!
I can’t wait to hear “mom I can’t go to the prom I’m a sex offender”. It’s gonna get real good.

BA – The problem as you have so articulately stated has to do with the “culture of prosecutors”, and has nothing to do with age – young, old, or otherwise. The culture of prosecutors dictates their beliefs and their actions, which is “punish at all costs and at all times”, otherwise you are not a member of the club.

By the way..the D.A. that’s pictured in the article looks like he’s maybe 40 yrs old. That makes him what? a MILLENIAL?

They must follow all the laws that were put in place prior to them becoming a DA, so they are keeping there jobs! so i say laws made by babyboomers most likely.

The ignorance of a lot of this is that technology is creating criminals and they think it is OK! Maybe they are just creating jobs for there selfish future.

I would change the term “must follow” to “should follow”. It is not the laws that are the fundamental problem. Prosecutors are sworn to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law. That is their essential duty. The problem is that their incentives are to win at all costs and to maximize punishment.

Consider that in the federal system over 97% of criminal cases are resolved through plea agreements. That means a prosecutor must obtain that number to be considered as having average performance. In any competitive hierarchy quantitative measures in efficiency reports are preferable to subjective evaluations (fewer bias complaints). So above-average numbers are critical for ambitious prosecutors to climb the career ladder. I don’t know which specific numbers are used to evaluate prosecutors, e.g. hours/case, dollars/case, years/case, conviction percentage. But I do know that abstract concepts like justice and due process don’t lend themselves to numerical measurements.

That incentive system, coupled with the fact that prosecutors have not just “qualified immunity” but “absolute immunity”, may induce prosecutors to push the ethical envelope. Many of us have experienced that directly. Until a system is in place to hold prosecutors accountable to their oaths, the age of lawmakers will matter little. Remember, “polichickens” have their own distorted incentives.


The DA was elected earlier this year. This is a political position so he has to say this to get re-elected. Google his name and read his bio at the 4th JD in CO.

I believe that victims of sex crimes don’t have any particular rights, or even represent an interest group regarding registration. They received their retribution, fairness and justice in the criminal punishment phase. The registry is ostensibly intended to increase future public safety, not to continue punishment for prior crimes. (BTW, I don’t believe the registry contributes to public safety.)

Victims had their say at sentencing, whether or not they agree that the punishment was adequate. Court-ordered retribution for a criminal offense is appropriate. Continuing to extract revenge through the registry is not.

For the same reason, I don’t believe the district attorney has a stake in registry regulations either. They get their pound of flesh and promotion points through the courts.


Exactly right. Why would anyone even ask a prosecutor their opinion?

Perhaps in some states, but not all. In Wisconsins, for example, a fairly recent addition to the mix is a ‘victim’s bill of rights’ which is now part of our constitution. The involvement of the victim of a case never ends in Wisconsin.

In the amendment one section enumerating victim involvement doesn’t seem to include registration.

“Upon request, to be heard in any proceeding during which a right of the victim is implicated, including release, plea, sentencing, disposition, parole, revocation, expungement, or pardon.”

Other sections relate to the criminal case not to registration, which is considered only a civil regulatory measure and not a component of the “case.” I believe the amendment was unnecessary, but those rights, if deemed appropriate, should have been kept at the statutory level, not included in the state constitution. Moral panic strikes again.


What I like about this proposal is that it properly labels the behavior as having occurred in the past. It doesn’t define who the person currently is, just what they’ve done in the past.

‘Sex Offender’ implies a current situation and a present day risk which may or may not be accurate.

One small step.

“Risk reduction”. Sure. That’s hilarious.

Nothing has ever made me as risky and dangerous as being listed on the Oppression Lists. There’s nothing even close.

And because I’ve been listed for decades, incessantly called “sex offender”, and my family has been mistreated every day because of that – I don’t give the first FUUUUUU** about victims. Not today. Not tomorrow.

So just go ahead and keep calling me “sex offender”. It shows just how smart and moral you aren’t.

Let the war rage.

The CO SOMB mtgs can be found @ somb meetings

Their newsroom link was for October, 2021.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x