General Comments Apr 2022

Janice Bellucci, I was just informed by the bakersfield registration office that doj is still keeping the names and pics of offenders who have been granted to stop registering. The nice lady here at the registration is willing to give you guys the head public defenders name. So this means that the only benefit to being tier 1 or 2 is you don’t have to come down once a year but all your info is still on the internet!! Are you or chance overseeing aware of this?

“Sex offenders,” as a class, would not exist without the persistent notion that “sexual orientation” is a fundamental, unchanging aspect of a person, despite having found no genetic or brain markers for the existence of such a thing. You don’t need to posit the existence of a core “orientation” or “gender identity” to argue that people who identify as gay or transgender should not be punished. It’s led to a persistent belief that what we are attracted to is a part of what we are, which not only makes the public terrified of men found to have engaged in illegal sexual acts, but also convinces many men they must be a pedophile or a “minor attracted person” because of an urge they might have felt. It is firmly my belief that there is no such thing as pedophile, any more than there is a person born a “shoplifter”. These are bad habits that can be broken, as almost everyone here has shown (otherwise you’d be back in jail).

Is in person registration happening again in Los Angeles?

Anyone know anything about moving to another state after receiving a COR? Tired of the high cost of living in CA and have been offered employment in Nevada. If I’m free and no longer on the registry, I would think I’d be free to move. However, I read somewhere that if I moved, the new state would place me right back on the registry despite me technically having no record any longer. I have an expungement and COR. Also, my misdemeanor crime was with a 16 year old girl and from what I’ve read, 16 is the legal age in Nevada so it wouldn’t even have been a crime there.

Well [here] is my final fo Cal. State court. Do not know why no org has done this, every other state in jurisdiction except Nevada now requires assessments.

[Moderators note: Please provide .pdf files for inclusion on the website.]

Speaking of TEXAS,

The Fifth Circuit is no stranger to cases that implicate the infamous qualified immunity doctrine. This judge-made rule shields government officials, including police officers, from liability — and in turn accountability — in most cases. To get past this defense, it’s not enough to show that a constitutional violation occurred. Plaintiffs must show that the official violated a “clearly established” right. To meet this high threshold, courts of appeals generally require plaintiffs to identify a case (1) from their own jurisdiction (2) with virtually identical facts (3) that holds that the specific right at issue exists. More often than not, even the smallest factual difference will prompt courts to save government officials from accountability, no matter how clear and gross the constitutional violation.

But that is not what the U.S. Supreme Court demands. Recently, the high court has emphasized that judges must not shut their eyes to obvious constitutional violations and that government officials will not be shielded from liability simply because there is not a factually identical case on point. The relevant question, says the Supreme Court, is whether the government actors were “on notice” that their behavior violated the Constitution’s demands. And some behavior is so obviously unconstitutional that every officer would be on notice even though there is no factually analogous case telling them so. Despite this admonishment — and the fact that the Supreme Court has reversed the Fifth Circuit twice in recent years for failing to recognize obvious constitutional violations — the court of appeals continues to parse minute factual details to deny accountability.

That is what happened in the case of Jacqueline Craig. In 2016, Craig reported to police that a neighbor had choked her 7-year-old son for “littering” (dropping raisins on the neighbor’s lawn). Rather than take the allegations seriously, Fort Worth, Texas, police officer William Martin interrupted Jacqueline to ask why she failed to teach her son not to litter. He then suggested that the neighbor’s violence was justified because her 7-year-old “broke the law.” Martin warned that if Jacqueline kept yelling at him, he would arrest her for “piss[ing him] off.”

Martin made good on his threat. Shoving his taser in her back, Martin took Jacqueline to the ground and forcefully handcuffed her. He then forcefully arrested her 15-year-old daughter before kicking her for not getting into his cruiser fast enough.

While this was unfolding, Jacqueline’s 18-year-old daughter, Brea Hymond, recorded the interaction from a safe distance. Infuriated with Brea for recording and yelling at him, Martin charged at her, grabbed her, threw her against his police vehicle, ripped the phone from her hands, and placed her under arrest for “interfering.” But he was not done showing his authority.

Martin stood by his patrol vehicle, effortlessly holding Brea by his side with a single hand, when she declared that she saw Martin kick her little sister. At this, Martin began to question Brea about her name and age, but she didn’t answer. So, with her hands cuffed behind her back, Martin wrenched Brea’s arms backward into the air, using what is known as a “pain control maneuver,” and loudly repeated his questions into her ear.

Brea was restrained. She was not resisting arrest. She did not pose a risk to anyone’s safety. Yet Martin inflicted pain on her solely to compel her to answer his questions.

Seeking to vindicate their constitutional rights, the family sued Martin, arguing that his force against each woman was unconstitutionally excessive. Predictably, the officer invoked qualified immunity. The district court rejected that defense, but three judges on the court of appeals disagreed.

On appeal, the panel ruled that none of Martin’s actions amounted to a constitutional violation. And with respect to Brea, it held that the officer’s use of a pain control maneuver “was not objectively unreasonable” because the force was “relatively minimal,” meaning it did not cause her severe physical injury. Yet, at the same time, it acknowledged that the force was not a response to any risk Brea posed; “[o]nly after Hymond refused to provide Martin with her name did Martin employ any force against her.”

This decision is objectively, obviously incorrect under Supreme Court and Fifth Circuit precedent. The Fifth Circuit has repeatedly held that striking a non-resisting suspect is unconstitutional, no matter if the injury was severe or insignificant. Any force that is not legally justified is excessive.

Instead of honoring that well-established rule, however, the panel here brushed aside any harm Brea suffered and split hairs between earlier cases to avoid holding Martin accountable.

Martin’s actions were excessive and violated Brea’s constitutional right to be free from unreasonable force. Numerous groups across the ideological spectrum agree. The Institute for Justice (where I am an attorney), the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, the ACLU of Texas, Cato Institute, and the Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic all filed friend-of-the-court briefs asking the full Fifth Circuit to overturn the panel’s decision.

If this precedent is allowed to stand, police officers would have carte blanche to coerce answers out of restrained individuals through pain. But the Constitution demands more than a system that endorses government officials forcing people to play “say uncle.” It demands reason. It demands accountability.

Hi my name is Sam and I’m a registrant in California I just recently came back out prison for a non-sexual offense the crime that I got convicted for is over 23 years old so I’ve been on parole as you would imagine for nearly half of my life I have never ever seen more blanketing of sex offender conditions that I have at this time my crime is 23 years old this is ridiculous I feel like I’m under the thumb it is the most horrible experience I’ve ever had so degrading and inhumane I’ve gotten complete counseling while I was in there voluntarily I truly hate the system but I have to deal with it I feel bad for the people that have 20 and 10 year paroles luckily my crime is so long ago that it’s not like that for me I see these people in here living on the streets because they can’t find adequate housing it is super hard out here I am so thankful for people and your organization for helping people in my situation this is truly been horrendous and I continue to believe that it’s not ever going to change I’m so glad that people are out there fighting for that change even though it seems like it’s bleak fear is completely and totally the van that lawmakers are driving to change these types of laws and public Opinion I respect the fact that children need to be protected but I can’t understand why it has to be so so hard on everyone I see people that I haven’t seen for years and they’ve aged so much the parole department has no consideration for helping these people they can’t even get into halfway houses half the time let alone in treatment drug treatment program California has very little treatment for people or tolerance for people with these type of crimes even though they may have happened two decades ago the truth is people change. The whole time I was on parole they had a condition that I could be around no minors including my own child even though my child was never victimized by anyone this is ruined my relationship with my kid.she’s 20 years old now and now they just now changed it to where that people can be around minors as long as they’re immediate family this is atrocious to me I have spent nearly my whole life behind bars and watch my daughter’s lapse from being a beautiful child into a super cool adult but I couldn’t even be around it this is killed me inside thankfully my daughter understands I just wanted to say this because it was on my mind and if anybody’s out there that reads this and they’re going through the same type of thing I feel bad for you and your situation is definitely bleak.

Anybody know if it’s possible to have a misdemeanor cp conviction expunged in California?

⭐⭐⭐ Slate News: From Hastert to Gaetz: Let’s talk about Republicans and sex crimes

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/04/from-hastert-to-gaetz-lets-talk-about-republicans-and-sex-crimes.html

(No offense intended, GOP supporters, but the party does tend to be the one most rabidly attacking Registrants at every opportunity. 🤷🏻‍♂️)