Source: ACSOL
Up to 32,000 people could be added to the California registry if Senate Bill 1128 is enacted into law, according to the California Department of Justice. That is because the bill would require individuals convicted of Penal Code Section 261.5, unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, to register if the age gap was 10 years or more.
Currently individuals convicted of PC 261.5, unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor are not required to register regardless of the age gap. If enacted into law, the bill would be applied retroactively.
“If this bill is enacted into law, individuals convicted decades ago could be required to register for the first time,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “Therefore, we must stop Senate Bill 1128 as soon as possible.”
According to the California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB), there would be a “significant cost” to state and local governments if SB 1128 became law. The bill would also unwind the stated purpose of the Tiered Registry Law, according to one CASOMB member. That purpose was to reduce what was previously considered a bloated state registry. Another CASOMB member added that passage of SB 1128 would set 32,000 people “up to fail” and make their lives as unstable as possible due to housing and employment challenges.
The co-authors of Senate Bill 1128 are Senator Anthony Portantino of the San Fernando Valley and Assemblymember Blanca Rubio of West Covina. Both legislators are Democrats. SB 1128 was introduced on February 13 and the Senate passed the bill on May 23. Senator Scott Wiener, author of the Tiered Registry Bill, voted against SB 1128 both during a Senate Public Safety committee hearing and on the floor of the Senate.
SB 1128 has been referred to the Assembly Public Safety Committee which will next consider the bill. That Committee, however, has not yet set a hearing date.
“We must oppose Senate Bill 1128 in order to prevent the addition of more than 30,000 people to the registry,” stated Bellucci. “ACSOL leaders will soon prepare a strategy to stop this bill and that information will be shared on this website as well as sent by email and text.”
Members of the California Sex Offender Management Board discussed SB 1128 during its meeting today. The Board plans to issue a point paper regarding possible impacts of the bill upon individuals convicted of PC 261.5 as well as state and local governments.
Join ACSOL on July 2 to Oppose sb 1128
I don’t see how this would retroactively fly in CA. Even if passed, that aspect should easily be defeated in court.
And that is the reason the registry has to be abolished in its entirety. They will always try to introduce new laws for PFRs and make them retroactive. So we have 100+ people who got off the registry, but now 32,000 might be added. It’s not a victory any longer.
What if you were charged for 261.5 unlawful sex with a minor and L & L for the same person?
Usually I try to avoid the use of the term, “Idiot,” when referring to a state senator, but this is one of those instances where saying, “What were they thinking,” just doesn’t suffice. It seems to be an unconstitutional ex post facto bill thrown together without any meaningful consideration for the upheaval for those affected as well as the countless taxpayer dollars it would take to suddenly criminalize up to 32,000 people. More tax dollars will be spent when Janice officially challenges their stupidity, unless they come to their senses before this cancerous legislation gets as far as the governor.
Why would people who have had unlawful sex with a minor, 10+ years their junior, not be required to register at all, when people who have only attempted or had “intent,” be tossed into Tier 3?
Another Smith.vs Doe retroactive ordeal !!! This is again if passed totally unconstitutional on its face! Maybe when this lawsuit hits the Supreme Court on its constitutionality , maybe ASOL could also consolidate the Smith .vs Doe issue and kill this law and finally reversed the Smith .vs doe choke hold on individuals whom are forced to register, retroactively, even when their conviction was before the ridiculous passing of Megan’s law based solely on fear-mongering voters to pass the Magan law in California !
WTF is their rationale for doing this? Seriously, what are they thinking and why now? Political cred? Someone needs to find out what their motive is for this now other than to cause harm to more than just those who were convicted, but those those who were minors at the time.
Did anyone think to ask the authors and sponsors of this bill how many unregistered PC 261.5 convicts were later convicted of another sex offense? Or, if there are any, how registration would have prevented said subsequent offenses?
Personally, I find it quite funny that the criminals are still pretending that their Registries do anything good. I think it is hilarious that they waste so much resources f*cking around with their Registries. The Registries are a giant pile of feces and these criminal legislators think pushing some of it over here or over there, or adding more feces to it or removing some, changes what it is. It is pathetic but also their incompetence is funny.
I’ll help the criminals out – I’ve been a PFR for decades, the Registries have NEVER come close to protecting anyone from anything that I might do. The Registries don’t do a thing to keep me away from supposedly “risky” or “dangerous” behavior. In fact, because the Registries exist, I make sure I stay in those situations. Every day, I ensure the Registries do nothing useful.
The weekend is upon and this weekend, I will do what I do pretty much every single weekend, especially in the summer – I will live a great life totally unaffected and uninhibited by the Registries and I will ensure no one is helped. I will be around all kind of families and children and none of them will have any chance of knowing that they are around a “super dangerous” PFR. Sad. I think the criminals need to create some more of their dipsh*t “laws”.
Let’s face it, anyone who supports Registries is today is a garbage P.O.S. There is no need to treat them as if they are citizens with rights. There is no need to treat them as humans. They are terrorists. They are enemies to be crushed. I’ll keep enjoying it.
How exactly does this make the public safer? ” Show me the money” and follow the money to see the true motivations for these dumb bills. Send these politicians to Alcatraz for ” treatment”
Meanwhile, LA’s city council just voted unanimously to move toward pulling police from enforcing traffic laws, despite it having some of the most deadly roads in the nation (Los Angeles council OKs study of removing police from traffic enforcement). This is all being done in the name of “equity.”
So much for the “incrementalism” strategy. For those not paying attention, the roller coaster hasn’t even reached the top yet – and it won’t for at least 50 years. There is simply no public outrage or backlash against any new measures or requirement being added to these laws because the public has been brainwashed into thinking the registry is needed and necessary.
You’d have better luck getting them to believe God doesn’t exist or that their precious guns won’t save them some day.
A judge is going to have to step in and put an end to all this after-the-fact tinkering, tier-bumping and expansion.
When I sat down with my lawyer 27 years ago to strategize and decide whether to go to trial or plea bargain *** the single most important consideration*** was where I’d be placed on the CA registry, (or, back then, minimizing how much of my personal information would be shared with the Public). Registry placement was more important to me than even possible jail time or accepting felony charges over misdemeanor.
My lawyer and I both agreed that living life as a no-post, (no info shared publicly, just with police), was survivable, (and it was), so we went with a specific strategy to make that happen. The compromises with the DA were painful. Had I been facing a Tier 3 placement, our defense strategy would have been much more aggressive.
Bottom line, I made an **agreement** with the DA **based upon the 290 laws of the time**! That agreement should stand today, and yet the Legislature ripped it up.
How is this Constitutional??
Wait… Why is dirty pictures required to register, but those who literally have sex with children are not required to register? Did they not say the purpose of the registry was to protect children and vulnerable adults from people who might prey on them? Who could possibly look at a person who already preyed on a child and say “hey he does not need to register because he would not prey on a child or vulnerable adult”? Lets be clear NO ONE should be forced to register, but as long as the registry is the law of the land why is it not being used for the stated purpose?
I think they made this PC for Celebrities, Politicians, untouchables and Folks with good attorneys and lots of money. Why have I been on the registry for almost 35 years for a wobbler 288 (C) reduced and expunged but yet these folks actually committed rape the last time I checked. I don’t wish the registry on anyone but this is clearly a major discrepancy. It came to light when comparing 288(c) to other offenses from CASOMB and now lawmakers are like “What?”
I will be there and have sent my letter to the Committee. I hope many others will be there as well to Stand Up and Speak Out.
“The bill would also unwind the stated purpose of the Tiered Registry Law, according to one CASOMB member. That purpose was to reduce what was previously considered a bloated state registry.”
Well…you’re kind of leaving out some details. The Tiered Law’s “stated purpose” of reducing the numbers doesn’t jive with the unintended result of increasing the number of people.on the public website. That’s kind of reason #1 why people don’t want to be on the registry in the first place