ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (01/15 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Recording of Emergency ACSOL meeting about new SORNA regulations


General Comments

General Comments Jan 2022

Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of Jan 2022. Contributions should relate to the cause and goals of this organization and please, keep it courteous and civil. This section is not intended for posting links to news articles without additional relevant comment.

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

🎉🎊 Happy New Year 2022!! 👏🏻😃🌎✨
‘Wishing all of you a great year! 🤗

Happy New Year, David, Janice, Chance and all the rest of my PFR brothers and sisters!

Another year passes, while more and more citizens are becoming indentured to government electronic database upkeep every day. What was marketed as a savior for our most vulnerable children now makes them more vulnerable to predation than ever, and ensnares them more and more too. Our leadership should be ashamed of themselves but the profits are too good to ignore.

Whether monetary or by power through election, the profits are indeed too good to ignore.

Tim in Wi

I don’t believe our leadership will ever be ashamed of themselves. All they care about is power, money, and control no matter what happens. As Americans we are to blame for not holding them accountable, instead of being in Congress most should be in prison. Don’t think Hell would want them!!

Registry Terrorists are not capable of shame. They aren’t the best of people.

Sounds like family members on my dad’s side. I just play chestnuts roasting on an open fire all day long, but they live in the Midwest and honestly I don’t care what happens to them. I hope they like heat cause they can have it blacked to a crisp.

So as of today tier 2 offenders addresses are not posted?
Is that correct? I want my address off homefacts if that’s the case.

Hi Steve,
That is what I thought. When I searched the websites I noticed many people who should be a tier 2 still have everything listed. Maybe some could be TBD, but not all. I found this very odd!! Why did the DOJ not update anything yet? Holding off for SORNA? God I hope not. I am not an offender so I can check freely. Anyone find anything differently? Also found no CP as Tier 3 which is a good thing.

Kinda. Tier 2 is name and postal code. So you’ll still be on homefacts

yeah but they can’t show full address.

True. But I don’t understand the logic here since a quick Google search of the persons name + postal code will easily delivery the address. Legislature is still living as if it’s the 1980’s in oh so many matters.


I believe it depends on the crime, not the tier (unless it’s 1)

Looks like it changed today (Monday) – address wasn’t listed on 1/1 but it is now for us…

What changed? Addresses are now posted for whom and where?

We only had the county listed, now shows full address. Designated as Tier 3 in California

tier three addresses should only be posted now i believe.

I’m tier 2 and my address is still listed on the site. Who knows how long they will take to update it.

Hi GN,
I am afraid the DOJ is doing this on purpose as it is going to align 288 a’s with SORNA! I have checked a lot of 288’s and have found all addresses listed. Something is suspicious here. Complete BS that pansy CA won’t stand up and stand by their tier system. Very concerned by this!

we’ll if that’s were true why are they listing cp then that are tier one on sorna? to early to worry about that imo

@Steve, that is because In CA CP, not all, are a Tier 3. I am very worried by the comments made from the SORNA recent passed regulations that stated it is the basic and states can add more regulations. So even though Cp is a Tier 1 under SORNA, it is a Tier 3 in CA and that trumps SORNA. It’s a pure BS system with knives at each end. This is just my worry, nothing proven yet. But it is suspicious how all CPs are a 3 now and 288’s addresses are still listed.

GN – Were you aware that your address would be listed? Was it not listed before, and if not, did they send you the 30 day notice that it will be listed now?

Yes, I knew it would, was prepared with it though. We did not get any notice in the mail.

Is this rumor true? Tier 2 here and this would open a lot of opportunity in terms of where I could live.

I’ve searched the new law and haven’t seen anything stating that addresses would be removed from tier 2.

It’s under internet disclosure in SB 384.

Tier 1 is no public info listed except for those with a 647.6 conviction, which will be listed as if they were Tier 2.

Tier 2 is postal code only.

Tier 3 is full info.

Folks – Received a letter today from the DOJ regarding my Internet exclusion. It was dated December 29, recognized my original request and approval for exclusion years ago as well as stated that I will still be excluded going forward. Also said that if anything in the law changed they would provide me 30 day notice before listing me. Janice has been assisting me to ensure that my exclusion was maintained so I’m speculating that the letter was an answer back from all of the hard work and efforts from her over the last month. Janice thanks so much for your help and for all you do for us!

When are tier 2 address going to be removed? as of today my address is still listed

Starting off this New Year can be a bit much for families or anyone that is mixed up with the registry. Am looking at some views I have picked up over the past year of coming to ACSOL website or Vicki Henry’s and other sights. These slogans such as “Erase the Hate”, all lives matter, even True justice is a Better Way but one of the main thing’s is Human Rights Matter.
So yes The new President need to bring back Constitutional Justice and True values in America. This Justice System is a bit out of place on that. But commenting is sharing viewpoints is good.. Yes we should give ACSOL and even Vicki’s and many other advocates a big hand.
Sure I’ve been out to Utah traveling thru by bus. Was up in PA once and yes government is different in every state but its never to late for change to come. So that’s why each of us have to stand up as a team.
Your either with a program or not. Its somewhat like school and yes I have been expelled and tarty a few times. I know I am single but I look at this registry as a challenge in many ways for True American Justice.

Interesting mention of “Rule 11” and “Alford” pleas: Sex offender freed after appeal.

I wonder if a California registrant whose conviction has been dismissed under 1203.4 should take steps to “comply” with SORNA once the latest regulations take effect…

As always speak with an attorney but I would suggest “Hell no” as an answer. SORNA laws themselves say that you can not be charged if you are not notified. Do not offer your compliance as they will surely accept it. Make them Make you. If they know your address and phone number – move and get a new number. Don’t make it easy for them.

Happy New Years!!! I will be flying into Poland from another country ‘Not the United States’. I have been officially living outside the US for 2months. Will the US still notify Poland that I am arriving since I do not need to let anyone know of my international travel plans.

That is a question a lot probably want the answer to.

With the usual disclaimer “Nobody knows anything for sure”, I doubt that Satan Watch has the capability of scanning all airline manifests around the world. I’m pretty sure they only scan flight manifests for flights leaving the USA. That was their main justification for the passport marker, because they couldn’t track you past the first country you stop in.

Has anyone been able to reduce their sentence charge after completing deferred adjudication?
I still have to register 10 years after completing it. I have one more year left completing my sentence. I know I qualify to deregister in Texas. But it’s such a really long wait 🙁

Ell, This is a complicated issue in Texas and I suggest you contact Texas Voices of Reason and Justice and ask to be referred to an attorney who has been through the de-regisration process for a consultation. I think it would be well worth paying for 30 minutes of time with the referred to attorney where you can explain your situation and ask your questions. And I would to this as soon as possible while you still have time left on your sentence.

Texas Voices of Reason and Justice Really hasn’t got any positive done that I’ve noticed. Correct me if I’m wrong.

F-Texas, TVRJ has stopped (for now) the counties from implementing residency restrictions. There have been a few other small victories both inside and outside the state capital that I am aware of and that you can ask of any of the board members. The volunteers of TVRJ have been constantly and without pay educating and building relationships both inside and the capital.

Without TVRJ, things would be worse. And don’t put the blame on them if you have not seen more victories. They have to play defense in Texas and it is an almost impossible uphill battle.

They and no one else will be able to make major pro-active changes in Texas, not even the courts because the courts are the most conservative courts in the country as the 5th Circuit has ruled against every sex offender case to the best of my knowledge. From a practical standpoint, only the US Supreme Court can effect changes in Texas, but that is also not totally true as we still do not have our first amendment rights the US Supreme Court has ruled in more than one case – we still have to give the state our internet identifiers, an unconstitutional and also expo facto state law in my case but I don’t have the hundreds of thousands of dollars to fight.

And no elected state judge who wants to stay in office will rule in favor of the constitution if a sex offender is involved. Even the state supreme court has ruled it is ok to adopt expo-facto state laws when the state constitution clearly and with no exceptions prohibits both civil and criminal expo-facto laws being adopted. The judges care more about re-election than the state constitution.

There have been journalistic articles disclosing to the public the state criminal justice committee is a joke, has no budget, and has for a long time accomplished no criminal justice reform (not just for those required to register). The current governor has been on public record opposing absolutely any criminal justice reform of any kind no matter how minor and instead thinks the state needs to come down harder.

Remember, this state has led the Western world for many years in executing people including minors and people with mental intellectual issues under the prior governor who ruled for more than a decade, who tried to become the US President, was appointed to lead a federal agency that he publicly stated he wanted to abolish prior to the appointment and who also has been caught being involved in trying to overturn democracy. Executions have continued under the current governor, though at a much slower pace.

Even the US Supreme Court has had to step in because of the execution of minors and people with intellectual issues.

And Texas is the wild west allowing almost anyone and with no training required, to openly carry guns in most public places. Even though law enforcement opposed this bill, the bill was adopted.

So my point is Texas has always been hard on crime, not smart on crime. So don’t expect many major victories – but it is not the fault of TVRJ. Just be thankful that without them, your life would be worse. I suggest you contact them and ask what they have accomplished that I have not mentioned here.

In the future if you want less restrictions, you may have to relocate to a different non-SORNA state which has a better track record than Texas. F-Texas, I am only here because of family but open to relocating in the future.

Eli when I was in jr High in the 60’s I listened to my Civic Class good. Never even though I would take some CJ coruses in College, in fact never thought I would graduate.This thing about PA caught my eye. Home of the liberty Bell and democracy and for a time being it was the Capital… correct me Moderators on that. Today with this computer which is just a machine is a bit anti justice in a can.I even got this new computer and I don’t know a thing about to even upload my programs.

See programs are programs just like justice is justice. Yes everything came from Pennsylvania our laws and sure today they are all being shadowed blame it on computers or man’s interventions but the basics are still truth.I have seven more months left and I’m still ready to go at Government. Worrying isn’t’ good for anyone but Action of a positive view is.

What happened with the story about retired military getting on bases?

So, where are we with those offenses that received a PC1203.4? Is that still in the works somewhere? Also, the dynamic risk in combination with the static one that seems to be the only one being considered, when even Karl Hanson emphasizes that the dynamic factors have to be considered and risk scores go down with offense free time.

People who have 1203.4 still need to register with CA. It doesn’t really do anything for that. But 1203.4 under SORNA considers you to not have a conviction, thus not requiring registration. So nothing really changed on this front since at least 2016.

I guess that’s a positive note that I didn’t know of before with CA 1203.4 and SORNA compliant states, you are not part of the registry process.

Now, this is a bit confusing, though. The IML is supposed to represent the federal, then shouldn’t all CA 1203.4 recipient not be a part of the IML due to SORNA? I do understand the IML uses individual states, but why b/c each state’s registry has differences to get one on there. The IML, SORNA, and individual state’s registry presents odd consistencies.

Timmmy even after WWW II my uncle got his full VA benefits. They even lived in moved to Florida from WV were I use to live. Is government taking away benefits not that is a crime.

These Government benefits now that is a crime and unjuut in many ways when they start taking away those.. Even refusing many to a PX or things of that nature.Vain justice hyperbolic justice, cover up justice its all the same.. Yes we all look to refresh on this registry issue and of course this 2023 justice call in D.C.

Hey all,

I had to do my annual today, Jan 3rd.
I was convicted of 311.11(a) state felony in 2012. I had the case dismissed via 1203.4 but no 17b.
I was informed by the agent that I was tier 1 and I could petition for removal next year.
I hope this brings hope to someone in the same position as me.
The agent was very informative and supportive.
If I am relieved, I am going to try for a 17b (if it’s possible at this point) to get back other rights as the DA or judge would hopefully see that it would serve no purpose not to. I did receive a suspended sentence but I have read judges have been given more power to give a 17b even with a suspended sentence. I do not have a source at the moment. If not, that is fine. My big thing, as most of us is to be relieved of the duty to register.
Again, I hope it brings someone hope. If you can get it, please get the 1203.4. I am not sure if it will work for everyone though.

What State was this in? I’am in California had a 17b from felony to misdemeanor also 311.11a so I would be tier 1 also and I also got off Megan’s website

If you got it reduced to a misdemeanor, then you for sure should be tier 1 regardless if you got the 1203.4 or not. And if you’re conviction was prior to 2014, you should automatically be eligible for the 1203.4. I’m surprised your lawyer didn’t file for the 1203.4 at the same time as both things are on the same form and 1203.4 is guaranteed while 17b is up to the judges whims.

This was in Cali my friend.

So do think I should also pursue 1203.4 as well, Do you think I t would help with the RSO ? Please advise give your thoughts
Thanks Mike

Hey Mike,
Thank you for the reply.
I think if your conviction was before 2014 and for the same thing, go for it. To be honest, I was too scared to file it on my own and hired an attorney to do it. I did not want to show up in person as well.
If that doesn’t bother you, you can file yourself and serve it to the DA.
I think we owe to ourselves to do everything we can to lower the charge to the best of our ability and a 1203.4 is something we can do.
After the 1203.4 was approved, I mailed a letter to the California doj and wrote I wanted to be excluded immediately and I think explaining why (used law codes as a hail Mary). They sent a letter back stating that I was already being excluded due to the 1203.4.
Maybe if you draw it to their attention, they will review it.
I am no legal expert but will do everything in my power to get over this.
If you need any advice, encouraging words, etc let me know as we are all struggling to find ways to get over our past.

Matthew – So, are you saying if you have a 1230.4, you will be excluded from the public site? Do you have any resources where it states this, and if so, is this applicable to California?

I am just saying what happened to me. the letter I wrote just copied the 1203.4 statue.
So the source is just my experience.

Matthew – Did you e-mail the DOJ with the 1203.4 statute or send an actual letter?

I sent an actual letter. Brief that just quoted how it started it would no longer should be considered a felony

Hey Mathew next time you or any others, write a letter to governor or anyone considering this registry.. Entitle it SEXUAL DEFRAUDING . How many have been defrauded in the USA with this registry for a common good of a Nation, State, or other. Sure reading and writing are good but some even have trouble with compound fractions not to mention compound justice. ASCOL is starting off good in this New Year and each one of you all can make a difference.

Matthew – One more question. You mention the year 2014. Why is that relevant? Did something change that year?

2014 was when an amendment to 1203.4 took effect that put 311.11 on a restriction list that made in ineligible for 1203.4. Convictions prior to then are not affected by this. And some have still been able to get this, but i don’t know the process the lawyers used for that

SR – In your opinion, how would the 1203.4 effect a person whose offense is Tier 1, but the risk score places him in Tier 3. Would the 1203.4 at least keep that person from being publicly disclosed if he can’t be moved back down to Tier 1?

This I’m not sure about as the risk based placement completely ignores every penal code. My guess would be that 1203.4 would unfortunately not affect this. At least in this case, you have the 20-year off ramp.

But I do think you’d be off the public net as 1203.4 says you’re no longer convicted and being posted on the net requires them to list what you were convicted of. So they can’t broadcast a conviction that isn’t technically there anymore

SR – That is the most logical explanation I have heard in a long time, I never even thought of this, but it really makes sense. Sure, the Tier 3 classification based on Risk Score can be argued as it does not consider the dynamic factors, but that will take a bit more finesse and a willing attorney to challenge. However, the part about the public site showing a conviction that has been set aside can’t be legal.

That’s interesting information and the first time I’ve seen it work this way. I guess CA treats 1203.4 convictions as misdemeanors for the purposes of the registry since it technically removes your conviction? I guess I’ll see if it’ll work the same way with my 311.4a.

In regards to your 17b question, yes, go file for it. You’re definitely eligible. And after all this time, I’m sure you’ll get it. From what I read on this, all the times the judges have denied this was due to them feeling not enough time has passed. In a lot of such cases, people try to file ASAP, right after their 3-year probation is over (or sooner), and the judges have said they’d like to wait until the 5+ year mark to really make sure you’ve stayed out of trouble while not on supervision.

SR – How does that make sense? If a 1203.4 removes the conviction, it should not be treated as a misdemeanor but a removed conviction entirely.

Don’t try too hard to make logical sense of it. But as to why, this is my guess/understanding.

1203.4 vacates your conviction. For majority of things this clears your record. The three exceptions are that if your conviction included the loss of owning a firearm, 1203.4 does not restore this right. It also requires you to say “yes” about your conviction for certain applications, such as public office. The last part, that’s key to us, is that it was also amended to no longer automatically deregister you.

The convoluted part (my guess) is that for all other aspects of law is that you no longer have either a felony nor a misdemeanor. And since some parts of of the register (T2 & T3) specifically look at whether or not you have a felony, they technically can’t categories you in that since you don’t have a felony. But because you also can’t automatically deregister you per that amendment, they stick you in the lowest possible tier as per SB 384 if you don’t fall into tier 2 or 3. They’re basically trying to appease as much as possibly the various laws that don’t jive together.

The part where some people are screwed who have the 17b reduction and/or 1203.4 is that some codes, like 288.2, are not felony or misdemeanor specific. Just that you were convicted of that code at some point.

Some people seem to misunderstand what Tier 1 includes, thinking that its misdemeanors. Tier 1 is actually 100% of every conviction code unless otherwise noted per Tier 2 and Tier 3. So if you follow my above explanation above, it kinda makes sense, even if it’s totally stupid.

As I always keep saying, justice and law are not the same thing, and law is 99.9% about technicalities rather than intent. The whole SB 384 being reshuffled because of one POS person, gave us this convoluted result that may have been intended or some missed typos, but otherwise is what it is at the end of the day because that’s how our system works.

SR – Under SB384, it says “the following persons shall register”, among it being a “felony” violation of 288.2. Shouldn’t that mean that a misdemeanor 288.2 is not even registrable? Where does is say that a 17b will not bring you down to Tier 1?

That’s a good question and probably why ACSOL feels this is wrong. In the preceding section its says what you quoted. But then when you look at the actual Tier 3 section it simply lists the code regardless of the level of conviction that it was. So DOJ is likely looking at this section and sees that 288.2 is indifferent, and just permanently sticks you into Tier 3 regardless.

(C) The person [is tier 3 if the person] was convicted of violating any of the following:

(i) Section 187 while attempting to commit or committing an act punishable under Section 261, 286, 288, 288a, or 289.

(ii) Section 207 or 209 with intent to violate Section 261, 286, 288, 288a, or 289.

(iii) Section 220.

(iv) Subdivision (b) of Section 266h.

(v) Subdivision (b) of Section 266i.

(vi) Section 266j.

(vii) Section 267.

(viii) Section 269.

(ix) Subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 288.

(x) Section 288.2.

17b doesn’t say anything where it brings you down to on the tiered registry. Some codes in Tier 3 specifically say Felony. Some just have the number. 288.2 is one of the codes that’s just a number, which is very likely as to why 17b and 1203.4 currently has no effect on them.

It’ll likely be several years and lawsuits before the CA registry is ironed out.

Last edited 11 days ago by SR

SR – I know exactly what you are saying. However, what I stated is also in the new law SB384 (Today’s law as amended). So, there is definitely a contradiction. Why does (x) Section 288.2 have to be the correct one? Why not 290.(c) The following persons shall register….’or any felony violation of Section 288.2″. Clearly, the DOJ just saw the (x) 288.2 and some volunteers or computers tiered them in 3, disregarding the 290.(c) part.

Try contacting DOJ and asking them about this, pointing out the felony part. See what kinda response you get. I’m with you and it does read to me like only the felony needs to register based on the first part. This may be one of the first things ACSOL tackles.

So, basically, it boils down to the DOJ misinterpreting the new law (since they don’t even understand it), putting people in the wrong Tier and making information public when they legally probably can’t. Will there be a class action defamation lawsuit once this is all sorted out and they realize their mistake?

Thank you SR for the words of encouragement!

Ok so am I posted online full info now?

Had 288.2(A)(1) 7 years ago, got 17b and 1203.4 a couple of years ago. Have never been listed at all but just got my letter saying I’m Tier 3.

I can’t look myself since that’s illegal.

If I am listed, is there anything that can be done?

I survived 7 years ago with my job, wife, kids, and (barely) sanity. Now this. Might not be able to survive this.

Jesus hang in there. A lot of us went through it back when the internet listing first became a thing, 2002. It was very hard at first but it gets easier to deal with. Just assume everyone knows and go on living your life. Your family needs you.

Yep. For me personally, I couldn’t care less who knows and doesn’t. Anyone that has an issue with it is dumbf*ck garbage and I don’t want them around my family anyway. The Registries are helpful at least that they help identify dumbf*ck garbage.

The real problem with all of it is that big government can’t stop harassing my family and telling us to do things. They need to keep their stupid lists and maintain them themselves. Stop involving my family in their “public safety” lies.

They are too dumb and arrogant to stop uselessly harassing. The war must rage. Sic semper tyrannis. All kinds of countries have had civil wars nearly all the time. Amerika demands it.

Jesus H – Was your offense that was never listed publicly then and got added to Tier 3 with the new law, or did you have to file for an exclusion? Also, why is the DOJ not following the law, notifying people that they will be listed. Here is an a part of their FAQ page: If I am currently excluded from the Megan’s Law website will I remain excluded?
Pursuant to amendments to Penal Code section 290.46 resulting from SB 384, registrants who were previously granted exclusion may no longer be eligible for exclusion. If the CA DOJ determines that a person who was granted an exclusion under a former version of Penal Code section 290.46(e) would not qualify for exclusion under Penal Code section 290.46(d) as amended under SB 384, the CA DOJ shall rescind the exclusion, make a reasonable effort to provide notification to registrant that the exclusion has been rescinded, and, no sooner than 30 days after notification is attempted, make information about the registrant available to the public on the Megan’s Law website as provided in Penal Code section 290.46(d) as amended under SB 384. And for those, whose offenses were never publicly listed and are now Tier 3 because of a nonsense risk score that is static, why were those people not notified that they will be now listed? Is that even legal? For 22 years, he was not listed, and now he is without any warning? Plus, the Static 99R needs to be only considered along with changing factors. If they are so adamant that a static score is so accurate, why then do they post people with a “0” or “1” on the public site? They make absolutely no sense, and I am ready to really go to town to fight this. Supposedly, the only changes to SB384 were the exclusion part, so why are the “non-disclosed by law” now on the public site. There is no mention that this has also changed, like the exclusion part.

288.2 is a unique snowflake. A misdemeanor conviction is not a registrable offense, while a felony conviction has heretofore never been on the public website. This is not via an exclusion, but by the simple fact that it never was listed under the offenses that qualify for public disclosure.

Under SB 384, a misdemeanor conviction is still non-registrable, while a felony conviction is Tier 3. As far as website inclusion, it is NOT listed by PC code number for the website, but it is included under the catch-all (V) “A tier three offender, as described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) of Section 290.”

DOJ is not considering 17(b) reductions as grounds for placing a resulting misdemeanor conviction into Tier 1 based upon People v. Kennedy, a May, 2010 appellate court decision. In Kennedy, the plaintiff was convicted of a felony count of 288.2 and required to register. He was later granted a reduction to misdemeanor per 17(b) and the sued to have his registration requirement lifted based on the fact that the misdemeanor 288.2 is non-registrable. The appellate court ruled that the 17(b) reduction made Kennedy’s offense a misdemeanor from that time forth, but not retroactively.

California’s DOJ is taking that position with all 288.2s that have been reduced to misdemeanors. Of course, Kennedy was seeking to have his requirement to register eliminated by the fact of reduction. There is no case law relating to tier placement. The DOJ is NOT doing this with other reduced offenses, only with 288.2, because they are using Kennedy to continue “considering” the resulting misdemeanor as a felony, stating the relief is not “retroactive” for tiering purposes.

The tiers are arbitrary labels for disclosure level
of information.288(a) is a tier 2 offense,but is
listed with full address as before.Misdemeanors
(that are against minors)in tier 3 are listed in zip code
category,also like the old law. So,this is not really
a change for most.

I think you’re misreading and/or misunderstanding 288.2 under the new tiered registry. 288.2 is tier 3 regardless of it being a felony or misdemeanor. It’s why in the bill when listed under Tier 3 its doesn’t specify either way while doing so with others like 311.11. This is one of the points of contention ACSOL has with SB 384 (beyond it just being screwed up in general thanks to a single senator).

Yes, I understand that. However when you look at 290(c)(1), which details which convictions require registration, it specifically states that ONLY felony convictions for 288.2 PC are registrable. That was the way it was under the old 290, and post-SB 384 290. So the misdemeanor convictions are still non-registrable. The issue at hand is why this particular wobbler, upon reduction to misdemeanor, is not receiving tier 1 status. The answer, as was told to me by my attorney, who quoted directly from DOJ, is because of People v Kennedy.

And yes, that single legislator has been quite the prize

If you were not listed on ML previous, but now you are, then you might have a case that the new law increased your penalty.

There have been many other states that this has been held up. You might want to contact someone from ACSOL about this as it is evidence that your conditions were enhanced due to new law.

I don’t know if I’m listed, I’m just saying that being Tier 3 the law says that Tier 3’s are listed.

I haven’t actually checked if I’m listed because (like all of us) I’m not allowed to check the megans site. And I’m not about to ask someone else to check.

I have not received any letter about being listed. I was excluded not because I asked for it, but as pointed out above, it wasn’t on the list of offenses that are.

Other than being public or not, and probably more important, is whether I should even be Tier 3 with having both 17b and 1203.4. I need to know there’s a way out. Before there was the COR option, if I was Tier 1 I’d be able to petition (in only 3 years from now!) but Tier 3 means never. Or does it?

I really, seriously need to know there’s a way out.

Does anyone really know?

As posted above, the situation with 288.2 not benefiting from 17(b) reduction presents as an equal protection violation. I mentioned you speak with Chance. It would be…enlightening.

Spoke to Chance about 288.2 specifically with exact same situation, expunged and reduced. He offered no hope. He suggested talking with Janice. I see only 2 options 1. Sue 2. Get the tier law changed. I’m game for class action lawsuit if anyone cares to join and Janice is willing to help.

Concerned wife – I am in for a class action suit regarding the entire corrupt registry, especially the nonsense Static-99R risk assessment.

When you start to hear random car horns & trucks with loud mufflers “revving” as they pass and the ever-present stares at your property/home from occupants of vehicles, you’ll automatically know.

Last edited 16 days ago by Facts should matter

Jesus H – If you are a true Tier 3, meaning that you are Tier 3 based on your Penal Code, then registry is lifetime, and you can not petition to get off. Hopefully, things will change with the registry, and it will be abolished altogether. There are way too many angry people to not be able to make a difference at some point. If you are a Tier 3 solely based on your risk score, and you would otherwise be a Tier 1 or 2, you can petition to get off the registry after 20 years.

New Person – What other states have upheld this? Do you think, this would be a good argument here in CA? Also, I don’t know if anyone was notified 30 days prior to being listed as was mandated by the new law. It says that no sooner than 30 days after making a reasonable attempt shall the information be made public. Why is nobody fighting and arguing this?

Michigan and Pennsylvania stated that newer laws that affected those with increased penalty was deemed punishment, thus ex post facto.

With the new tiered registry in CA, they distinguish three levels to online ML’s:

  1. No publicly listed.
  2. Partial info listed, zip code
  3. Full info listed

Why have graduated ML laws? Simple, it increases penalty due to your tiering.

If one was excluded from the ML previously and now is online, then the penalty increased. If one was excluded from the ML previously due to 1203.4 and now is online, then SB384 conflicts with the previous PC290 law that allowed 1203.4 recipients to be excluded from ML. (CA Constitution Article 1, SEC. 9.  A bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts may not be passed.)

Because JesusH earned a 17(b), then there should be an equal protection case. (CA Const. Art. 1, (b) A citizen or class of citizens may not be granted privileges or immunities not granted on the same terms to all citizens. Privileges or immunities granted by the Legislature may be altered or revoked.)

Why does one set of registrants who earn a 17B not share the same terms as all the other 17B sex convictions of being placed in tier 1, but is listed as a tier 3? This makes no sense as their previous conviction did not deem the conviction severe to exclude the ability to reduce the charge from felony to a misdemeanor.

I think this might be the strongest reason for a suit because it is beyond the registry. It brings forth the CA Constitution judicial system and avoids the fact the registry is a regulatory scheme as it reveals an inconsistent form of justice within the same convict group.

This inconsistency could bring forth ACSOL to look at the rest of SB384 to the courts and reveal the lack of scientific evidence for the tiered system along with no pathway off the registry runs contrary to Dr, Karl Hanson’s research work that the max monitoring should be 17 years.

Another aspect that I thought about was if JesusH were once eligible for CoR, then that could be another form of increased penalty. Under the previous registry scheme, one was eligible to petition off the registry after 10 years from your conviction date. In the new registry scheme (SB384), one had the potential path off the registry went from 10 years (similar to tier 1) to potentially never be able to get off the registry (tier 3).

This might be helpful with the 17(b) argument b/c it does reveal the consistency that a 17(b) recipient has a chance to petition off the registry after 10 years from the date of conviction akin to the 10 year wait to apply for the CoR. (I don’t know if 288.2’s were eligible for CoR, but if they were, then it would definitely show the inconsistency between the old registry system and new one.)

New Person:

They were. Even felony versions, with the caveat that they must have earned a 1203.4 pc expungement, as was necessary for all CORs.

My original lawyer mentioned the COR and that was my plan all along. 10 years would’ve been in mid 2025. Now that seems to be gone.

He also said I would not be listed on the site. All of that was why I took the plea. Again, I don’t know if I am listed now, I’m too chicken to ask someone to check, but if the new law says Tier 3’s are listed then I’m screwed.

I also don’t understand why if 17b/1203.4 say it’s reduced and dismissed “for all intents and purposes” why any of this is even a thing.

Why does one set of registrants who earn a 17B not share the same terms as all the other 17B sex convictions of being placed in tier 1, but is listed as a tier 3? This makes no sense as their previous conviction did not deem the conviction severe to exclude the ability to reduce the charge from felony to a misdemeanor.

This is because Tier 1 is anything that’s not Tier 2 or Tier 3 and not Felony/Misdemeanor specific. Some codes in Tier 2 and Tier 3 (such as 288.2) are not felony or misdemeanor specific while others are (311.11 and others). So reduction and dismissal in some cases becomes irrelevant. And all this is due to the amendment to 1203.4 that says it no longer grants relief in regards to no longer registering.

You’re trying to apply intent logic. This isn’t something that courts and DOJ deem relevant as it’s not their place to guess as to what the legislatures that crafted and voted on bill actually intended. Both the judge and DOJ apply the laws verbatim. The only exception is if the judge feels the law somehow is in conflict with a constitution. Outside of that, they’ll flat out tell you if that’s not what the legislature intended, it’s squarely on them to fix it.

Please point me to the page or link on your website where I can find a list of the states and their registration requirements. I plan to travel from California to other states.Thank you in advance.

Here you go. But you’ll be prudent to actually contact an attorney for whatever states are on your list to get a most solid answer. Use the info in the links as guides and not solid fact.

Thank you!

Thank you!

if you qualified and earned a 1203.4 (CA), then SORNA states do not require you to be part of the registry scheme. Here is a link to those states: link.

Also use the links provided by SR and C. Go to the state’s website registration page. I’d probably follow SR’s advice of contacting an atty about it.

Good luck!

Wait, really?

Nirvana ‘Nevermind’ Baby Album Cover Lawsuit Dismissed by Judge
Since we have discussed this before here, it is not CP either, I know you all have been waiting for this to happen, but he does get more time to file again if he wants…

Crazy as this lawsuit is, what really blows my mind is that it’s been 30 years since Nevermind was released. Hearing Smells Like Teen Spirit takes me right back to where I was when I first heard it: the weight pile at Soledad on year 4 of an 8 year stretch.
<sigh> Good times…

I remember hearing the album while at Soledad North weight pile during my stay at Lassen building, on an eight year stretch. I was the Watch Commander clerk. The Lieutenant read my file and said I was railroaded. He used to bring in outside food for me and leave it in the trash bin.

That was nice of him. I was in Shasta Hall, and also a clerk for about a year and it definitely had perks like critical worker status during lockdowns, better phone access, etc.

He’s making a mockery of the legal system given his behavior benefitting from the picture. This is a squeeze play that lawyers are using him to gain from.

I’m surprised they havent gone after “Blind Faith” for their album cover.

Or Zeppelin.

Neither Zep or BF would be found guilty of the charges being pressed in the baby album cover picture case. Does not meet the definition required to be found guilty. This guy is just embarrassing himself at this point, but have to wait and see what he brings for the next filing, if he actually brings one.

In this sex registry many times a person can be railroaded or forced to registy as Will Allan and others use FTR and much of this registry interrogation/ intimidation type evaluation and that right their is unjust punishment or undue punishment and one has to look at it that way. Yes they considered my texting bad enough to classify me as a tier 3 but the public attorney and the evaluation part was to incriminate me more in and of itself in registry game.

Sure I have a letter from the Public Defender saying I am not violent but what is violent today when justice strives to castrates but at the same time they are castrating themselves in this blind justice ordeal called the sex registry in many of these issues. Truth will finely come out in much of this registry.

I am on the registry in Michigan. I am also a board certified alcohol and drug counselor. If any of you need this type of service please feel free to reach out. No judgement, no shame. People on the registry have an extremely high rate of depression which leads to co-occurring substance abuse disorders. Nobody seems to be acknowledging this issue. I intend to work in this field with folks on the registry until I die. This is my passion, and light needs to be shed on this important issue.

Last edited 16 days ago by Addiction-counselor

Addiction-Counselor – Thank you for your offer to reach out. I agree that the registry causes a lot of anxiety and stress, especially since ever changing laws can affect people who thought they were free from this tyranny. It has become my passion, as I learned over the years just how wrong the registry is. No matter what type of offense was committed, once a person served their time and received their punishment, they should be able to move forward with their lives. The ever increasing restrictions are pure punishment. Maybe, back in 2003, it was not deemed punishment, but too much has been added or changed since so that it has now become nothing but punitive. Nobody can argue against that. Thanks for your support in this matter.

What’s especially sad about stings, is if the baiting that occurs by law enforcement is targeted at someone who has mental health or a neurodevelopmental condition, such as ADHD or Autism, what law enforcement is doing is trying to trigger these people. This is akin to Russian Roulette, they are trying to press buttons to trigger an event and eventually there’s going to be a round in the chamber. Doing this to anyone with Mental Health and / or nurodevelopmental conditions in my opinion is cruel and inhumane and I wonder if it violates the American Disabilities Act which applies to all areas of public life? There are many sitting in Jail today that would not be if it were not for LECs intentially committing mental health abuse and working to trigger said event.

I would like to know how you believe LE is targeting individuals who have such conditions. Did the target admit to such condition? Does LE know beforehand these people have such conditions and do such actions to where LE feels they need to be targeted?

There have been articles written in the past where people with such conditions, as you noted, who were still held to the same standards as persons who do not have the conditions and regardless of their condition impeding their ability to rationally think about the actions which got them in trouble in the first place. It would seem LE and the courts do not really care about such conditions when it comes down to it, unless the death penalty is involved.

Last edited 16 days ago by TS

A lot of LE are scumbags but I can’t imagine many of them would intentionally target people with special needs. What kind of scum would do that?

But if you think about it, that is kind of the whole essence of the stings. They are targeting vulnerable people. No offense to anyone here (because anyone can end up in compromised, “reduced capacity” situation), but smart, informed people who are really trying to find children are not being caught in these stings. The people they are catching have some reduced capacity somehow. Perhaps it is just an terrible time in their lives and they are on drugs. Or perhaps the person’s IQ is 90. Whatever it is. Stings target vulnerable people and that is who they catch. I like the Russian Roulette analogy.

In my opinion, stings are all a bunch of immoral nonsense. I think LE are too lazy to actually try to prevent crimes that might actually become real. Or even crimes that did happen! It’s a LOT easier to target vulnerable people. Especially people with low IQs. Especially if they are struggling in most aspects of life already. It is super fun to imprison those people. Immoral.

And regardless of what the LE liars say, they are tempting people. I don’t see much difference than walking up to someone on the street and saying, “Hey, I know where there is a bank that is very easy to rob.”

If LE is doing stings, they have far too much time on their hands. They need to do some real work. Stop the “crime waves”. Or at least stop lying about crime waves existing. If there are crime waves then they shouldn’t be playing around with stings.

I shouldn’t have used the word targeted, but TS understood the point I was trying to make. Everyone is the group therapy I attended was battling with mental health issues such as depression and anxiety, had ADHD, were on the autism spectrum or a combination of the aforementioned. Many people with these issues, if untreated and unable to manage these conditions, tend to isolate themselves and spend a lot of time online on the internet. There’s a large vulnerable population out there of people who would never commit a crime, but if they are continually pelted with triggers of an online sting, then the gun is eventually going to go off with the bait of an online sting by LECs. This is why we need a criminal justice system like Germany, one with civil servants, not politicians as judges, one that looks at someone who is arrested as a behavioral health issue first before throwing them in a cell and throwing away the key as criminals, especially in the case of non-violent offenses. In today’s call, someone else mentioned pursuing an American Disabilities Act case against SORNA which Janice said she’ll look into. Many people with mental health and / or nurodevelopmental condition have never been diagnosed or have never had access to mental health care until they were incarcerated and were interviewed by a psychologist.

A lot of people target those who are vulnerable. My older sister once got swept up into a cult, and only because she was at a very low time in her life and believed the words she was being told. Luckily, with a lot of research on that particular cult and with the help of friends and family we got her away from it. She is a smart person otherwise, just was in a really bad place at that time.

I think that is a very true statement- a lot of times it’s when someone is at their lowest point- looking for approval from people… a very real form of vulnerability.
I don’t doubt that it’s also because someone has a disability, or is drunk or on drugs.
Unfortunately also, even when people mention these things in the chat, LE and the prosecutors, who seem to almost always be on the good side to the judge- get to pick and choose what gets shown in the trial. And that’s even if it makes it to a trial and the person doesn’t get overcharged and simply plead out. Or they simply “lose the chat”. The parts that would make THEM look bad or predatory towards a conviction/ prosecution at least.

One hates to say this but they are using many as a sort of Scapegoat Justice today in this blind justice. I guess all have not sinned than. Scapegoat has a fascinating history. Today the word is used to refer to one who is wrongly blamed for something, but it originated with an actual goat.
Guess a computer is one’s pride and /or punishment today and even I am at a loss also but I do like Janices approach to this and we all have to approach this to understand real justice. Hey I’d would rather be wrong than right.

I read a story about a registrant who killed his ex girlfriend on Sunday. Hopefully registrants in California won’t have to be punished for something this pos did.

I mean, it’s not like he committed a sex crime. He wouldn’t even be Registered for this. Seems fine.

One thing we know for sure is that if the PFR actually did commit a crime then the Hit Lists nearly certainly contributed to it. Perhaps the Lists were the main cause?

😆🤣 Laughing (and crying) because it’s so very true!

“New Law Requires Sex Offenders To Display Novelty Welcome Mat Explaining Nature Of Crime”

(Satire. Note the source.)

Good share and good idea to add a disclaimer for those unfamiliar with the source.
So often, great satire sites, like The Onion and Babylon Bee, seem to be reporting current events.


Before the New Year, the Justice Department withdrew and replaced a Trump administration memo that would have forced thousands of people transferred from prison to home confinement during COVID-19 under the CARES Act to be needlessly sent back.

This is serious progress and our community helped make it possible.

Activists like you reached out to President Biden on this critical issue with us, while ACLU and our allies advocated for the administration to allow people on home confinement to remain with their families and communities without the fear of being taken away.

We pushed for nearly a year, and the Justice Department listened.

But I’ll be clear about one more thing, Richard: The fight isn’t over. The threat of an eventual return to prison is still present. And these individuals and their loved ones will not have permanent closure until their cases are fully resolved.

So while we celebrate today and commend the DOJ for its decision, we must take this progress and keep going.

Send a message to President Biden urging him to provide permanent relief to these families by granting clemency to those on home confinement under CARES.

With this latest development from his Justice Department, we have the president’s attention. And the more voices like yours he hears, the more he’ll keep paying attention and act.


Does anyone know when the addresses of Tier 2 will no longer appear in Megan Law website?

Mote while I’m not sure nor keep up with trying to notice if my tier # or one’s tier # is on the computer machine I would have to say that government measures all these so called sex offenders ordeals, to let others know of the tier. Those people that are not mixed up in this registry don’t understand or care. This computer notice is sublime and counter productive in many ways.

Might as well have a Wanted poster dead or alive if thats society scandel or standards. And one can also look at the discrimination of these electronic notices. So with what measures do they mete in this judgement call.

Austin sees hundreds of sex offender cases removed from police officer supervision due to defunding

Austin’s defunded police no longer have the staff to monitor sex offenders

“A 47-year-old man who failed to register in the sex offender database was arrested in Austin, Texas, last week after police officers caught him in the middle of a sexual act with an autistic teenager, and one expert says the city’s move to defund police has put it at the mercy of such criminals.”

“The mercy?” As has been said time after time, those who are bent to do such harm will do so regardless of a registry. As one can see, 1) the registry did not prevent this event from happening and 2) if APD was so concerned, then they would have moved it to the active case load for them to actually go hunt for the person in question. Statistically, this guy is in the very small minority of those who recidivate and obviously was out in public for whatever reason those in power felt it was ok for him to be out in (but maybe should not have been??).

Whether LE is defunded or just not provided their wish list of funding annually, more people means more opportunities for crime to happen regardless of the number of LE on the streets. Just research Austin where one will see how much it has grown of late and being named the fastest growing metro area in the USA.

Last edited 12 days ago by TS

Age old trick…..if your funding is threatened, just eliminate the program that will generate the loudest public outcry

Never thought of that, very insightful Warpath.

Slight twist – if you want to get more $$$$$ for something you just talk mainly about how it will be weaponized against “sex offenders”. I’ve seen that 100+ times, I’m sure.

Where I live, the local LE criminals were trying to fleece $$$$$ from the gullible public to install cameras everywhere. They told the dummies that they would be used to “catch sex offenders” driving by schools. They intentionally lied by failing to mention that “sex offenders” can drive by schools all day and night if they want, there is nothing wrong or illegal about it. But the dummies don’t know or care, of course.

Yeah, definitely should consider the source of this article.

As long as LE is doing ANYTHING with PFRs, they have far too much money and resources. Everyone should be working to defund big government and their LE criminals. Vote it all the time.

These people will fear monger as much as they possibly can to try to protect their $$$$$ and stay huge and bloated.

@Will Allen I agree 100% less gov’t , I think even all criminal records should be deleted automatic after the punishment is OV , giving all rights back ,paid in full

Fox “News” is just a confirmation bias echo chamber for the willfully ignorant. This is part and parcel for them to run a fear and hate mongering piece such as this. They know that anything along the lines of: “OUR VULNERABLE CHILDREN ARE IN IMMINENT DANGER” drives mouse clicks and profits.

The Daily Mail and FN are the well-spring for gutter journalism .

So in other words, is Fact should matter stating facts should matter?

Unlike those bastions of truth CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NPR and CBS, eh?

Any semblance of “fair and balanced” went out the window when the “news” became a profit center. They spend more time creating FUD and slamming each other than providing worthwhile facts.
It’s like professional wrestling, only less informative.

These organizations, especially NPR more than the others, attempt to hear from both sides of the story.

Wait! I thought that the feds were gonna pay the State’s to comply with SORNA? They keep reauthorizing funds to help states keep up the gambit, like hundreds of millions. If LE is misusing those funds and not using them for their intended purposes, I think an audit it needed. Oh yeah, and the new regulations are not an unfunded mandate, remember that.

Maybe, @JDUtah, a call for a GAO investigation into the granting of grant money and its uses at the state level, which has to be (just has to be, right?) supervised at the Fed level to ensure it is not being misused, is needed.

This could also apply to FLA as @Dustin called for when their state mandated report was released showing who lives in vs out of state. (Don’t know if it would help or hurt a current court challenge on the need to register in FLA even when one doesn’t live there, but it could certainly raise some questions.)

Problem with that idea is I’d hate to see the system get corrected only to be made worse for those who people who have a sex offense conviction and must register.

Last edited 10 days ago by TS

The Philippines Is Raising the Age of Consent. That May Not Be Enough to Protect Its Children
Interesting that other parts of the world have the same data set as the US does when it comes to those who perpetrate such actions, “…abusers, who are typically their relatives or connected to the family group.”

Last edited 12 days ago by TS

Dumb question…

If we enroll in a short term vocational certification type course do we have to register it like it’s an institution of higher education? A course like bartender school, sommelier school, truck driving school, etc? All of these are usually like 40-10 total of “course work” and not equivalent to a college-type situation.

This is not an dumb question…it is important, especially important considering
just how many avenues are cruelly blocked to us. I am sorry I don’t have an answer, but I suspect that this will depend on what State you live in…of course I could be entirely wrong on this.

I hope someone can answer this for you.

Best Wishes and Good Luck, James I

Last edited 12 days ago by James I

California. Should have included that. Sorry.

There are no dumb questions…

Unless I missed it, the annual registration form only mentions universities, colleges and “institutions of higher learning,” a familiar term, but so vague the Stasi will apply it however they want, I’ll bet.

Depends on your state. Here in Wisconsin the answer is yes. I even contact the registration office if I’m taking a few Zoom classes from a local religious organization.

When I did my CDL training I certainly was required to report it. It was too short term to make in onto my online registration, but they had a record of it and my back side was covered.

Institution of higher learning:
(f) The term “institution of higher learning” means a college, university, or similar institution, including a technical or business school, offering postsecondary level academic instruction that leads to an associate or higher degree if the school is empowered by the appropriate State education authority under State law to grant an associate or higher degree. When there is no State law to authorize the granting of a degree, the school may be recognized as an institution of higher learning if it is accredited for degree programs by a recognized accrediting agency. Such term shall also include a hospital offering educational programs at the postsecond­ary level without regard to whether the hospital grants a postsecondary degree. Such term shall also include an educational institution which is not located in a State, which offers a course leading to a standard college degree, or the equivalent, and which is recognized as such by the secretary of education (or comparable official) of the country or other jurisdiction in which the institution is located.

Source38 USC § 3452(f)


Who is providing your vocational education in this instance? You can refer to the USC I provided as the source of my other posting here to read more.

Currently none. I’m just trying to figure out what I want to try to do now that all my education, training, and certifications are useless.

The problem with the definition under federal law is each of these trade type schools have some sort of certification from sometime of a higher board above them, and provide official certification for graduation.

In what field is all your training and certs?

Education. I was a teacher. Degree in Political science (constitutional law/civil rights focus). Post graduate work in American History, Educabtion and Theology.

I long for a career with meaning, not manual labor job just punching a clock like I have.

Good luck. Hopefully you can find something fulfilling and lucrative where your background special background won’t be an issue.

Lovwill: you said creativity writing so who is writing creative justice today? Even Olin has told us about John Walsh this Adam ordeal. My PO just called me and yes I was suppose to report tomorrow for my monthly check in. Seems its been cancelled till a week later and than its by phone and yes you guessed it, its due to a Covid scare. Sure one can get so many shots but were does it all end in this safety ordeal. Even a friend of mind said to me you might even be accused of murder if you give it to someone which is sort of perplexing in and of itself.
Sure Will Allen talks about force to register guess it may come down to force to take a Covid shot. While I have already gotten one seems being a human pin cushion is a bit of much and an oversight but its something to think about. While I don’t know what goes on in many other states we still have to deal with this and I’m sure nobody even understands Covid.

It should make you feel better to know that doctors understand COVID very well. Don’t be confused by people spouting all kinds of nonsense. This should get past ACSOL’s moderators because it is actually not a controversial or debatable fact. There are just some people who want to believe that it is or sell that to you for gain for themselves.

Also, I’d like to tell a recent anecdote that mentioned COVID but is not really about that. I had a person tell me that I must remain listed on the Hit Lists and deprived of civil rights because our awesome governments are “forcing” people to get COVID vaccine shots!! That was nonsense of course but I told the person that he had it backwards – the Hit Lists were around long before COVID and today we don’t have to worry about anyone’s “rights” to not be forced to get shots simply because the Hit Lists were allowed. I don’t have to care about any “rights” that someone might dream they have. I can help governments violate any and all of them. Too bad, so sad. The Hit Lists are begging me to violate the “rights” of other people.

Sorry if this has already been posted somewhere:

I found it interesting. What say ye?

What say ye? Interesting. Nice to see someone trying to educate the public and nice to see that professionals prefer people to be able to seek treatment to prevent anything that should not happen. The article further added to my limited knowledge pertaining the issue.Too bad most of the public will never be educated on the issue.

Interesting read and quite informative, @Mike G. Thanks for the share.

Well, that didn’t last long.

It seems the public prefers to believe lies rather than the truth.

It is now a political issue. The right could absolutely destroy the left on this issue, especially when they tie it to police defunding. Clearly, it is too big a political liability for the left to even defend.

Will Allen so why are any of us here aside from being on the registry? Sure we can all speculate or add a comment or viewpoint but where is this theory justice coming from. Are we all not on needles and pins over much of this registry. Even long letters to give others Governmental approval or to show some caring in this registry. Do we all think too much or do we all sit back and wait for a great title wave to wash away the east coast or the west. I don’t have any answers to government may ham or how this public flagging is going to come out. Does government out in your area have all the answers or in many other states..
Sure battling Covid and even this registry is a whats best type of ordeal. Go with a government program, a protest program, or a type of intervention of understanding truth in government matters?

Furthermore should we all wonder why so many senators or government helpers or offidcals are just giving up and throwing in the towel as their view’s are being criticized as a”wet blanket” justice when some can’t even understand the preamble to the constitution today. one wonders is the registry some Jack London repel borders issue of if it saves one life or how many lives were lost in wars aside from carnal justice. One wonders who has the mark of justice today in America or should we all take one step back and two steps forward.
Even doing a tax return and going in blind to tackle it is a bit of a headache.

Frightening and High (redux) from SCOTUS:

“Sotomayor’s false claim that ‘over 100,000’ children are in ‘serious condition’ with covid”

You can find this online but the fact remains the high court introducing false facts into case arguments for persuasion again. Not cool. Bring cited facts or don’t speak up. (This isn’t about covid either so save it.)

They, like people everywhere, come to things with their own biases. They are also subject to gullibility, like everyone else.

Too bad they don’t do the research before speaking on issues as important as the ones coming before the court.

Too true, but look at what @Steve D provided below (the link re-posted here in this reply) to see it is all to frequent of an error: Opinion: The furor over Sonia Sotomayor’s false covid claim misses a more important problem
Frightening and High is still ringing bells when it should not be as well as other data points noted in the Op-Ed. The high court needs to look, read, UNDERSTAND, and then speak if they are going to speak of facts during arguments. Off the cuff comments at the heat of the moment introducing numbers will be taken as the gospel until proven otherwise, at which time it is too late because people will run with it.

Being a person on a court bench is one thing, but being on a very high or the highest court is another because of the expectations related to it. Carry it right or don’t carry it at all.

There is a huge difference between what SCOTUS did in Smith v Doe, 2003 and what Sotomayor did. In Smith v Doe, the info spouted about was court evidence. What Sotomayor did was introduce information not in the court evidence. It is easier to lambast Sotomayor, but for Smith v Doe, that court decision still upholds what we know is false evidence to be fact still.

Either way, what was said did make and could have had made a difference in the decision handed down by the high court. When the impact at that level is that great, as SCOTUS’ opinions are, whether evidence or just spoken, they need to watch what they say and use.

So, since a COR (Certificate of Rehabilitation) is no longer available with this new law, shouldn’t PC290.007 be amended in this case? Others mentioned that without this option, the new law definitely added a disability to registrants who were charged before this law, as I am sure they were told they could obtain a COR if certain criteria was met. That possibility has now been stripped from them. Anything that can be done about this injustice?

I think someone who wants to take this avenue should take this suit up with ACSOL behind that person.

PC290.007 remains in place b/c it is the new tiered scheme that becomes the new threshold to de-register instead of the CoR.

The new tiered scheme does relieve one from registering, which is one component of the CoR, but it does not share all the component benefits the CoR carries which is the state considers one rehabilitated and allows one to hold a license.

One can still apply for the CoR and to de-register from the new tiered scheme, but that’s doubling the effort and/or cost. I think all those convicted before the new tiered registry scheme should be allowed to go via the CoR route that also relieves one from the registry scheme.

I have seen there is no results for approved petitions in orange county or riverside county, it has been 6 months ? Is this going to be another oh well SORRY we do not have time for this, attitude in the courts? Nobody can ever move on.

Someone who cares and the fight goes on for many. Seems to me and I’m sure many that this registry is a dark page in History. Sure one could say wait a minute isn’t counseling good. Sure its good if it helps. Does this registry help anyone or just cause confusion to many.

Out of the fifty states in America and government can’t seem to learn their downfalls but want to be a dominion of themself and dominate others with this registry in this correct or unbalanced way or whatever happened to Hugh Hefner and his guidance counsel or his Playboy bunny clubs or even pin ups of GI’s on parole… oop… I mean patrol

Has anyone ever taken this to court and compared the registry is pretty much the same as probation or parole? If so, what hasnt it been brought up that one cant just randomly be placed on parole for past crimes (such as receiving a letter in the mail, you are are now on parole) so why us? My conviction is from the year 2000 and most of these new laws were created after that? Can they make new concentration camps and send me and others there “for the safety of the population?” what about a new euthanizing law for everyone previously convicted? Just at what point is all of this punishment? How far can they go?

Because of the Smith v Doe, 2003 decision, the registry is not considered punishment whereas probation and parole are punishment. Many states will circumvent this comparison.

California passed a law that circumvented this by stating in-person reporting was no longer punishment even though it is akin to probation or parole check-ins. Also in CA, compliance checks are not part of the registry laws, but local PD’s will enforce compliance checks as a part of their own law. A registrant no longer under custody does not have to adhere to compliance checks since it is not part of the registry scheme. This is how local PD’s can get away with compliance checks on those no longer under custody. I think ACSOL should use this fact that local PD’s do compliance checks on those no longer under custody as a direct comparison to probation or parole as local PD’s have added penalty onto the registry. To this date, compliance checks on those no longer under custody have not been addressed.

Again, it’s law makers that skirt the law. The 2003 Smith v Doe decision was based upon mail-in registration. Look how far it’s gone beyond that.

Does anyone know if some people still have to wear ankle monitors in the state of Georgia? I’ve thought of moving my family there, but I heard about that and would never move to a place where they could possibly make me wear something I havent ever worn my entire life. My convicton is from the year 2000, and I’m trying to get the rules. I spoke to someone in state the other day and they said while one can petition after 10 years on the registry, its 10 years in state on the registry, is this true as well?

Good Luck, Joseph. Hope you find your peace of mind, rewarding employment, and a real life. Safe travel.

Whats the point of the Static-99R if theres no way to have it redone on a yearly basis? Just getting out of prison in your 20s or 30s gives you a point right away. How is that point relevant when youre in your 40s? How is a score that puts you at high risk, but youve been out for decades relevant? Why is one given a point for a male victim but not a female one? (sounds kinda homophobic if you ask me) Im suprised no one has taken this very issue to court to show the Static-99R is nothing but quack science.

My appellate attorney has raised this issue in my appeal


Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s 2002 mistake about sex offenders and recidivism was even more catastrophic. Kennedy cited a pop psychology magazine’s claim that 80 percent of sex offenders go on to reoffend. The opinion has since been cited by lower courts more than 90 times to justify increasingly draconian punishments for offenders, including lifetime registries, residency restrictions that have left people living under bridges, and even indefinite detention after they’ve served their sentences. In fact, there was little evidence for the 80 percent figure at the time. Research has since shown
the rate to be somewhere between 8 and 35 percent. (And the very types of punishment
Kennedy’s opinion has unleashed tend to make recidivism more likely, not less.) The court has since had multiple opportunities to correct Kennedy’s mistake. It hasn’t.

Washington Post January 11, 2022 Opinion by
Radley Balko

KY: Judge tells ex-prison guard convicted of sexually assaulting a female inmate he can join the military or go to jail.

(No link icon available.)

Steve what is perverse or perverted justice today. Is America perverse in many ways or did a famous group say to the nation. Try to see it my way or we can work it out. Sure Janice and many on here want this to work out for not only US but for others that get or may get wrapped up in this registry.

Sure the days of peep shows are gone (? mark) just like the dust bowl or the depression of the pasts and a new challenges for many other things are today. computer challanges, government challenges child care, housing, etc or are we all walking around with a porno magazine stuck in our pockets to show our boses at work to fiddle the day away. Sure Janice is taking a good Action or what physician perscribes bad medicne. Common sense is that government is over abusing in many ways wouldn’t you all say so.

I hate to do this but here goes….So for the record in all states……where or what is our Heritage of our foundation in this nation today. Is it the peoples rule or are we still a Sovereign nation today? Is it all about a database or some 8 by 10 glossies found on a computer or a fictional ordeal by mass confusion to convict another. Sure its all about kids and many keep on forgetting so were does that leave true justice in someone’s eyes. A lawyer can do just so much and the more one study’s about this even the more idea of a trip to DC or even a round table or who who is obsolete and goes for new justice idea’s before and after the fact in this type of penal type justice.

One should wonders what is the action. Is it going down to prove in many of these ordeals or some ponze scheme of true justice measure in protecting, or was one’s internet encounter all fictional in character. Is even taking the bait in this type of wanting someone talking dirty to them one has to considered the justifiable of this type of law today. Is the proof shallow in many ways with the inducement, or is it a cut above morals,ethical or principal thinking in many of these registry ordeals.

I don’t care how much lawmakers and the FEDS attempt to humanewash it, there’s nothing “acting in good faith” about the existence of this registry.

Just don’t become desensitized to the shock and awe and abuse to where you succumb to Stockholm Syndrome. That’s what they want. They want us all to remain demoralized and dis-empowered and accept the “it is what it is” learned helplessness.

Just know that our culture protects and coddles low-effort ideas and gimmicks.

I agree completely. I’m done with their lies.

They want oppressed people to just accept it and comply. That is the last thing that should be done. As long as the Registries exist there must be the highest level of war possible. Amerika is in chaos and I’m loving it. It’s what they want.

Yeah, so I got a new DCS (department of community supervision) officer this month (Jan 2022). I’m in Ga and on CSL (community supervision for life from NJ since 2002). CSL is “as if on parole”; I am to abide by registration laws, Interstate Compact conditions (ICAOS), supervision laws from my state of conviction NJ and the state I went to Ga.

I moved to Ga through the Interstate Compact in 2013. I also had a court/DYFS/Parole Dept ruling from NJ saying I could have unsupervised contact with the victim and even live with the victim since 2005.

This wasn’t a problem since I move to Ga in 2013 until I got this new DCS officer until recently (Jan 2022). On her first visit she asked if I have had contact with the victim. I said yes, I have authorization to do so. She ok’d it but came back the next day stating she (the DCS) had no file on that.

Remember, I have been here since 2013. I dug up my paperwork and showed her it will take a bit. She left… stating get me a copy.

Not only did I text her a copy, email her a copy, I also mailed a copy.

The matter was resolved but that wonders why the hell didn’t DCS KNOW already?

And guess what? I get a new DCS officer next month (Feb). What lies ahead?

found this today concerning California, some good, some bad,,,,

As Riverside County leaders, we’re alarmed about bills in Sacramento

A heads up for those of you who rely upon information from the website of a state agency responsible for maintaining the sex offender database – you can not always rely upon that information. It is a good place to start and especially to obtain references to the state law.

I am reviewing one state in particular (the state is not CA nor TX where I live) and I am finding one statement on the state LE website regarding registered people moving into the state does not match the state law. In this one instance of what the state LE say vs what state law reads, it is possible in some circumstances that if one follows what is stated by the state LE, one would have to register longer than required by statute or register when not required to register per the statute.

In this one instance I found it appears to me the state LE made an attempt to be correct as they distinquished between certain time periods of when the laws changed due to court opinions and new laws being put into effect to counter the court opinions, but there is absolutely no paragraph or sentence in the law that backs up one statement on the state LE website for one of those two time periods. I think they just got confused, which is easy to do with law changes and court opinions. And this one wrong statement is even more wrong now after an issued state supreme court decision about a month ago.

All this brings up a second point. After reading the law that applies to you, be sure there are no court opinions that affect that law. And the third point is, if your misinterpretation could land you with a charge or prison time, after doing your research, first contact an attorney for confirmation of what you found before taking any action that could expose you to risk.

Do I believe LE and parole/probation sometimes lie to us, yes. One ex-probation officer lied to me all the time and most of the time I called her out on it. In retaliation she once had a false warrant for my arrest issued, but the judge threw it out. But I also believe at times these people try to state the right thing, but laws and court cases can be confusing. Read to protect what little rights you still posses that have not been unconstitutionally taken away.

This new DOJ thing is a little confusing, hopefully it won’t affect anyone who has been removed, due to any court rulings, I know when I went to court, when act 10 and 29 went into effect, my attorney did the comparison of my 1997 offense in the state I moved from, to the offense I currently live, because the DA in my county tried saying my offense was equal to one that would put me on for life but, that wasn’t true because the rules act 10/29 did no apply to me, they’re just trying to do a blanket law now which is, not legal, no matter how they want to look at it, all it’s going to do is jam people up, cost the states and federal government a boatload of funds, that could be used for much better things, part of the reason I believe that most states aren’t SORNA compliant is, because they know they will end up loosing money in the end, due to constitutional muster.

The whole Static-99R needs to be taken out of the Tiered Registry scheme. The more I think about it, the more mad I get. It is like someone showing a prospective employer a math score from 3rd grade, rather than taking a new more current math test. Just nonsense.

This is crazy.
Can anyone find me the exact citation and reporting requirements for Sacramento county or the CA state?????

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x