UT: Bill SB155 proposes to make it easier to be removed from Utah’s sex offender registry

Source: ksltv.com 2/1/25

SALT LAKE CITY — A controversial bill proposing changes to Utah’s sex offender registry was met with both support and criticism on Capitol Hill Friday.

When SB155 was first released by Senator Todd Weiler last week it was met with harsh criticism, on Friday a substitute bill was presented in the Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee. The original version of SB155 focused on moving certain criminal offenses with a lifetime sex offender registration to the list of offenses only requiring a 10-year registration.

But now this substitute bill focuses on reducing the length of time on the registry before a sex offender, after serving their full sentence, can request a risk assessment and go before a judge to ask to be removed from the registry.

HB 155 looks to allow those with a lifetime registration to appeal to a judge 12 years after their sentence, not the current 20. And those with a 10-year registration sentence to appeal after 5-years, instead of 8.

Read the full article

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Man, I’d love something like that in CA. These blanket ridged tiers are no bueno.

@SR, Utah registrants and supporters don’t need an organization to write letters and make calls supporting this bill. We have to start from somewhere, and that’s the most grassroots activism I can think of.

So they want to use common sense and judge the person on their current state instead of holding their past over them forever. It will never pass. Applies logic where no logic is used.

Let me guess, those with lifetime parole are exempt from any relief. My guess is the laws will change to include more lifetime parole sentences to be handed out to keep more individuals on the registry.

Shocked at first, but then it made sense after I read this: “…can request a risk assessment…”

This way they can release anyone they want from the pogrom’s death grip, while making absolutely certain everyone that is “Still a risk” will remain. Decide by Penal Code who is eligible, when they they become eligible if ever…. but wait there’s more!

Also, the “Assessment” may require a sort of “Probationary period” where the petitioning PFR must pay for monthly/weekly Polygraphs to ensure they are “Still progressing” to the point where it is “safe” to release them from the pogrom at some point.

As this gets more “successful”, they can introduce a new policy where newly convicted can get “delayed registration” by doing an “Needs assessment program” to determine what level of registration “Is needed” on a case by case basis. All paid for by the newly convicted potential PFR…. for as long as the State feels it is “Necessary”.

Instead of them paying to have people on the Pogrom for life, people pay to avoid it for life. Wait there’s still more….

Enhanced Illusion of Legitimacy! Now everyone that is on the Pogrom Hit List has been individually, “professionally assessed to be a Predator”! Assessments that are updated as often as they allow and the PFR can afford to pay for them. Thus the “need for” the Pogrom becomes even more unquestionable, as does everything the Legislature feels is “Regrettably, but Unfortunately Necessary” to require and prohibit! Under these circumstances, what wouldn’t be “All legal”?

Last but not least, they can change their minds at any point! They can throw any one person, or whole Penal Codes, or perhaps groups of people identified in other ways 🏳️‍🌈…. regardless of PC, back onto the hit list, whenever they feel like they, “Need to”.  Back on the list, and/or the “Assessment process”.

Start with the Pogrom, then Lifetime “Addiction” pogrom….Domestic Violence…. all kinds of people you can force to pay to avoid stuff!

Misleading headline.

Easier pathway to petition for removal, same level of difficulty to get off it. It’s like a Casino opening an hour earlier and closing an hour later.