Comments that are not specific to a certain post should go here, for the month of Oct 2024. 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.
“You are not qualified to be a juror.”
Got a jury duty notice yesterday here in LA County. When I went to the website and answered the preliminary questions (are you a citizen, can you speak English, etc) the final question was asking if I am required to register. I answered Yes. Then it said I wasn’t qualified and done, end.
Nobody likes jury duty but even then not being on probation, fulfilling all the punishments, getting 17b and 1203.4 the government tells me I’m not qualified to be a juror. I am not a regular citizen, I am an ‘other’.
How is this ok? It can’t be ok. We are in a special class of people.
F*ck that crap.
Why do I feel like this year is the first time I ever hear commercials on tv talking about PFR 🤔 like to oppose this politician because he supports PFR
This morning I received what I’m assuming is a scam text. It read the following, which was all accurate in terms of my location.
I know this is bogus as I haven’t been on supervision in nearly seven years. I blocked the number and have not interacted with it in any way. Looking up the phone number yields zero hits. The number this was sent from is 866-508-7225
Can anyone tell me how ACSOL removed presence restrictions in parks, beaches, etc? I cannot find the case. Did they litigate?
I found a CA Supreme Court case on residency restrictions, but that appears to be for those on parole, not in general. I want to read how CA was successful in these areas.
Have any MI Vets been allowed or denied entry to Selfridge JRB? It’s a long drive to the commisary only to be turned away at the gate if SJRB prohibits veterans/RPs access. Thanks all
California SAFE TASKED FORCE has scrubbed their complete existence from the internet, the only thing that pops up is some San Diego article BUT that’s it.
Can anyone please share their experience with public libraries? I understand they cannot fully ban PFRs from libraries, but can restrict them from children’s sections and programs. So a PFR can use the adult section, but has anyone had any problems? What if teens are in the adult section? What if mommy brings their little one in the adult section while they browse?
In the city next to me, the police were investigating prostitution at massage parlors including 1 located in the jurisdiction of another city. The operation led to 32 criminal charges against 28 suspects across 23 cases. But the DA dropped all charges once the DA learned 13 police officers had possible “inappropriate contact” with the suspected prostitutes.
The Chief of Police confirmed that three officers were fired, one was demoted and seven were suspended without pay.
I was at the VA hospital in Palo Alto Friday. I was meeting with my GP there and he had some basic Qs for me. How am I sleeping, any unmanageable stress in my life , any residual issues relating to PTSD (I did multiple tours and often current events in your life can trigger past trauma). My answers evidently concerned him enough that he recommended I see the shrink about possible meds and to schedule future appointments. I told him I’m pretty certain 90% of my problems concerning these issues will be cured in about 8 months. He looked at me, slightly bewildered, and asked, “And how do you plan an managing that”. I told him, “ I’ll be off the registry”(he already knew about my situation). He then asked what to any of us would be considered the dumbest Q ever, “ Is it really that bad?”. I told him to have a great day…………………
To those off the registry and that are single, I have asked my attorney if it is possible to change my name ( Due to entering the military under my stepfather’s name, all public records are as that ). I have my birth certificate verifying my original birth name. He informed me that if you haven’t been to state or federal prison and you aren’t on the registry then the court will be inclined to grant the petition. Obviously if your married or have kids , this could be on obstacle. Not so much for you but for them. It doesn’t hide your record from SS related issues, like taxes, background checks, etc. but could possibly make travel much easier. I’m guessing that kind of info is slow to get back to Angel Watch.
And you don’t worry about the other candidate doing the same thing in the basis of how she operated as Attorney General in California?
Your gov will only standup for those who will donate to their cause and is someone they’ll be proud to have doing it publicly. Of course, they will take any and all monies for their cause because they are greedy SOBs, but don’t think for a minute they will stand up for PFRs publicly. That could be political suicide otherwise, regardless if the rights that are trampled on them will spread potentially to others who are being punished.
Yes, it’s Florida – but no registry for her. “She…. will always be an admitted convicted murderer and will wear that stain for every day for the rest of her life”, (but she’ll be able to reintegrate into normal life with likely few people actually remembering her crime.)
Florida’s convicted killer clown released from prison
😫 I find these contradictions to be enormously frustrating! 😖
The second my name is removed from the registry, I’m filing for a name change the next day.
Here in California people forced to register aren’t allowed to change their names even though I’ve read stories of LGBTQ people forced to register who have.
I encourage every person forced to register to pay the money and charge there name’s to really common names and really famous celebrity names, you’ll be surprised how much this will drastically change your lives on the registry you could move around freely without people knowing about your past except your neighbors and HR at work but at least the whole job isn’t gonna find out till your all ready gone if it was a problem.
Question for the Registered People:
Who agrees that a excellent attorney would argue that his client should not be denied the opportunity to provide financial support under I-134A, Online Request to be a Supporter and Declaration of Financial Support nor the ability to immigrate a prospective wife under K-1 Visa.?
Esquivel Quintana has explicitly stated that a minor is defined as a person under the age of 16 in the context of statutory rape. Therefore, it cannot be classified as a specified offense against a minor, as the individual in question was not under the age of 16, and therefore not a minor, according to this definition.
It would be reasonable to suggest that a competent attorney would argue that his client should not be denied the opportunity to provide financial support under I-134A, the Online Request to be a Supporter and Declaration of Financial Support, or nor the ability to immigrate a prospective wife under K-1 Visa.
To conclude otherwise would say that US citizens don’t have the equal rights as Mr. Esquivel-Quintana. Which is an immigration case.
Using the Taylor analogy, looking back at the original offense is one of the steps in the categorical approach analysis.
When matching a crime to a removability ground, according to the Taylor Analysis, a court must look only to the fact of conviction and the statutory definition of the criminal offense to see if it matches a ground of removability. Only if there is a match of the elements can removability be found. When a criminal statute is divisible, a court can look at judicially noticeable facts to find exactly what the elements of the crime were.
Similarly, SORNA which is the basis of the AWA’s Fiancé Restriction, has been analyze under the rubric of Taylor v . United States:
In determining whether an offense constitutes a “sex offense,” courts typically use one of three approaches, two of which look at the elements of the offense of conviction, including the categorical approach[26] and the modified categorical approach.
See :
https://smart.ojp.gov/sorna/current-law/case-law/i-sorna-requirements
And
Here my point stands proven. Even in Seventh circuit, the court said the same:
United States v. Walker, 931 F.3d 576, 579 (7th Cir. 2019) (indicating that under categorical approach, “the actual facts underlying the defendant’s conviction don’t matter” and instead, “the court compares the elements of the predicate offense—i.e., the facts necessary for conviction—to the elements of the relevant federal offense” and “[i]f the elements of the predicate offense are the same (or narrower) than the federal offense, there is a categorical match”); United States v. Rogers, 804 F.3d 1233, 1234 (7th Cir. 2015) (“We conclude that the threshold definition of ‘sex offense’ found in § 16911(5)(A)(i) requires a categorical approach—an inquiry limited to the elements of the offense—but the exception in subsection (5)(C) calls for an examination of the specific facts of the offense conduct.”); Harder v. United States, Nos. 21-cv-188-jdp; 14-cr-67-jdp, 2021 WL 3418958, at *6 (W.D. Wis. Aug. 5, 2021) (holding that Louisiana offense of indecent behavior with a juvenile is a “sex offense” under SORNA because there is “a categorical match between the SORNA definition of sex offense and the Louisiana statute”), appeal filed, No. 21-2543 (7th Cir. Aug. 20, 2021)
The age of the complainant is an element of the person’s crime because without being underage there would not be a crime. See United States v. Rogers, 804 F.3d 1233, 1234 (7th Cir. 2015) (“We conclude that the threshold definition of ‘sex offense’ found in § 16911(5)(A)(i) requires a categorical approach—an inquiry limited to the elements of the offense—but the exception in subsection (5)(C) calls for an examination of the specific facts of the offense conduct.”); Harder v. United States, Nos. 21-cv-188-jdp; 14-cr-67-jdp, 2021 WL 3418958, at *6 (W.D. Wis. Aug. 5, 2021) (holding that Louisiana offense of indecent behavior with a juvenile is a “sex offense” under SORNA because there is “a categorical match between the SORNA definition of sex offense and the Louisiana statute”),
As a result thereof, whether there’s a’ categorical match between the SORNA definition of the sex offense and the state statute , could be answered by the definition of minor in Esquivel Quintana.
Why would the Supreme Court allow INA cases to define minor but in the same breath not allowing them to apply the decision to SORNA/AWA matters which becomes intertwined with immigration process?
It would be an absolute illogical approach.
Would you agrees
that a attorney would argue that his client should not be denied the opportunity to provide financial support under I-134A, Online Request to be a Supporter and Declaration of Financial Support nor the ability to immigrate a prospective wife under K-1 Visa based on the following argument?
You guys wrote the brief. I hope you can help me understand and apply it to the discussion below.
Esquivel Quintana has explicitly stated that a minor is defined as a person under the age of 16 in the context of statutory rape.
Therefore, it cannot be classified as a “specified offense against a minor”, as the individual in question was not under the age of 16, according to this definition.
It would be reasonable to suggest that a competent attorney would argue that his client should not be denied the opportunity to provide financial support under I-134A, the Online Request to be a Supporter and Declaration of Financial Support, nor the ability to immigrate a prospective wife under K-1 Visa.
To conclude otherwise would say that US citizens don’t have the equal rights as Esquivel-Quintana. Which is an immigration case.
Using the Taylor analogy, looking back at the original offense is one of the steps in the categorical approach analysis.
When matching a crime to a removability ground, according to the Taylor Analysis, a court must look only to the fact of conviction and the statutory definition of the criminal offense to see if it matches a ground of removability. Only if there is a match of the elements can removability be found. When a criminal statute is divisible, a court can look at judicially noticeable facts to find exactly what the elements of the crime were.
Similarly, SORNA which is the basis of the AWA’s Fiancé Restriction, has been analyze under the rubric of Taylor v . United States:
In determining whether an offense constitutes a “sex offense,” courts typically use one of three approaches, two of which look at the elements of the offense of conviction, including the categorical approach[26] and the modified categorical approach.
See :
https://smart.ojp.gov/sorna/current-law/case-law/i-sorna-requirements
Here my point stands proven. Even in Seventh circuit, the court said the same:
United States v. Walker, 931 F.3d 576, 579 (7th Cir. 2019) (indicating that under categorical approach, “the actual facts underlying the defendant’s conviction don’t matter” and instead, “the court compares the elements of the predicate offense—i.e., the facts necessary for conviction—to the elements of the relevant federal offense” and “[i]f the elements of the predicate offense are the same (or narrower) than the federal offense, there is a categorical match”); United States v. Rogers, 804 F.3d 1233, 1234 (7th Cir. 2015) (“We conclude that the threshold definition of ‘sex offense’ found in § 16911(5)(A)(i) requires a categorical approach—an inquiry limited to the elements of the offense—but the exception in subsection (5)(C) calls for an examination of the specific facts of the offense conduct.”); Harder v. United States, Nos. 21-cv-188-jdp; 14-cr-67-jdp, 2021 WL 3418958, at *6 (W.D. Wis. Aug. 5, 2021) (holding that Louisiana offense of indecent behavior with a juvenile is a “sex offense” under SORNA because there is “a categorical match between the SORNA definition of sex offense and the Louisiana statute”), appeal filed, No. 21-2543 (7th Cir. Aug. 20, 2021)
The age of the complainant is an element of the person’s crime because without her being underage there would not be a crime. See United States v. Rogers, 804 F.3d 1233, 1234 (7th Cir. 2015) (“We conclude that the threshold definition of ‘sex offense’ found in § 16911(5)(A)(i) requires a categorical approach—an inquiry limited to the elements of the offense—but the exception in subsection (5)(C) calls for an examination of the specific facts of the offense conduct.”); Harder v. United States, Nos. 21-cv-188-jdp; 14-cr-67-jdp, 2021 WL 3418958, at *6 (W.D. Wis. Aug. 5, 2021) (holding that Louisiana offense of indecent behavior with a juvenile is a “sex offense” under SORNA because there is “a categorical match between the SORNA definition of sex offense and the Louisiana statute”),
I’m in a small apartment in LA county. A neighbor not in my building (I can see them in my ring camera) just started posting my registry information on building around the neighborhood. Should I call the police? Will they help me considering this harassment? I don’t even know this person doing this. My landlord already says he wants me out because of this as well.
I found flyers posted with my registration information from the California website on my building an the other side building that faces ours. My ring camera shows the poster who I never met. Do you think the long beach police will help me based on harassment? My landlord is already trying to evict me based on the neighbors dislike. The triggering event was our fault we were not very good neighbors mostly my spouses fault.
So my husband has a conviction from over 30 years ago. He no longer has to register as he filed and was granted to be taken off. Our son is joining the Air Force and they do back ground checks for anyone attending graduation. Will my husband be denied entry? My son is unaware of the conviction.
For CA PFR’s, it looks like the state will retain its[…]
*** MODERATOR’S NOTE TO EVERYONE: BECAUSE POLITICAL EMOTIONS ARE HIGH AND EASILY RESULT IN FLAMING, THUS DERAILING OUR EFFORTS IN UNITY TO FIGHT FOR THE RIGHTS OF REGISTRANTS, WE ARE GOING TO BE EVEN MORE STRICT THAN USUAL ON DELETING ALL COMMENTS THAT MENTION POLITICAL PARTIES OR CONSERVATIVE VS LIBERAL
If you can be a felon and be president, they need to remove felon off of all job applications, rental applications, and professional certifications. If the highest position in the land can be taken by a felon, all positions should follow suit.
This is not an explicitly political post, but legitimately, with all the rhetoric against “pedos” and “groomers”, I am concerned. Terrified even, about the safety of PFR. Emigration is looking like safety right now. Anyone have data on PFR emigration? We have plenty on travel, and that’s great, but I feel like it’s time to go and would like some options. My first inclination is Germany, Spain or France, as I speak Spanish fluently, passable French and can understand quite a bit of German.
Advice or experience needed New York State Sex Offense Registry
I am, please God, finishing my twenty years January 2025, Level 1 cp possession. Any advice or experience gratefully received. Thanks