|
WE NEED YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION! This U.S. Supreme Court petition could have enormous impact in how the Court applies ex post facto to sex offender registries. A couple of years ago, NCRSOL reached out for testimonial shorts (a few relevant paragraphs) about the ways social media restrictions affect the lives of registered people. We received a lot of good responses, and several of them were used by Prof. John Korzen in the brief NARSOL submitted supporting the petitioner in Packingham v. North Carolina. Recently, NCRSOL and NARSOL were approached by Emory University Law School's Supreme Court Advocacy Program (ELSSCAP) seeking pro-bono clients for a case out of North Carolina with a pending petition for certiorari before the United States Supreme Court. NCRSOL and NARSOL have agreed to Emory University's request and will be filing an amicus brief in the Bethea case in early October. We are again in need of personal testimony statements. This brief will focus mostly on the types of harm people face as a consequence of being placed on the state's sex offender registry. Issues related to employment, schooling, harassment, access to religious services, and any other harm that is directly attributable to one's existence on the registry are what we are after. We do not need (and are not asking for) a bill of complaints, generally speaking. In other words, if you would like to contribute to this effort, be sure to express your words in ways that demonstrate actual harm or extremely hurtful situations that can be tied directly back to the cause of registration. If you were, for example, denied admission to an emergency shelter due to being on the registry, that would be a powerful statement. The case is styled In Re: Anthony Rayshon Bethea and was last considered by the N.C. Court of Appeals which published its final judgment on October 3, 2017. The case was subsequently appealed to the N.C. Supreme Court, which declined to consider it. At issue in this case is the retroactive application of federal sex offender registration standards in violation of the ex post facto clauses of both the federal and North Carolina constitutions. In deciding the matter, a panel of the N.C. Court of Appeals unanimously held that there was no ex post facto violation because the N.C. Legislature never intended for the sex offender registry to be punitive and that the effects of the law are not punitive. In light of the U.S. Supreme Court's more recent refusals to accept petitions from Michigan and Pennsylvania in cases where an opposite conclusion was reached, this case appears to have some merit. It has attracted the attention of a group of legal academics coordinated by Prof. Ira Ellman, who is well known for his 2015 law review article, "Frightening and High": The Supreme Court's Crucial Mistake About Sex Crime Statistics. Attorney Glenn Gerding (North Carolina Appellate Defender) is involved with the Bethea case, and Atty. Jim Grant, one of his Assistant Defenders, is representing the defendant. Glenn was responsible for representing Lester Packingham at trial and throughout the state appellate process that would inevitably end up at the nation's highest court where, to the shock of some, a unanimous bench struck down North Carolina's law prohibiting registered people from accessing social media. Again, what is needed from you are statements about the specific types of harm that you have faced as a consequence of being placed on the state's sex offender registry. If you, or someone you know, is currently ON the registry and would like to participate, please email me directly at rwvnral@ncrsol.org. If your testimonial is considered for inclusion in the brief, your full name will not be used in the brief submitted for the Court's review. I'm looking forward to your responses.
Thank you, --NARSOL (National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws) |
|
The registry: An unusual event took place last night in lower Manhattan, a rare live public debate about the sex offense registry. In front of a packed house Emily Horowitz, a sociologist and author of Protecting Our Kids?: How Sex Offender Laws Are Failing Us, went head-to-head with Marci Hamilton, a prominent child safety advocate. The pair debated this proposition: "All the laws requiring those convicted of sex offenses to put their names in a registry should be abolished." It was quite a show! And timely – with nearly 900,000 individuals required to sign the registry questions about its effectiveness are growing louder. Kudos to moderator Gene Epstein and everybody at The Soho Forum as well as co-sponsor Reason for sparking a great discussion! Check out the archived video, you'll get to see a carefully built, strong case *against* the registry. Also below are the informal poll numbers, there was a big shift in the post-debate figures. --Bill Dobbs, The Dobbs Wire 
WATCH ARCHIVED VIDEO: http://reason.com/blog/2018/02/12/should-the-sex-offender-registry-be-abol
|
|
America Is Hard to SeeType: Live theatrical production Location: New York City (SoHo) Date: Jan. 20-Feb. 24 8:30PM Featuring: Ken Barnett, John Carlin, Joyce Cohen, Amy Gaither Hayes, David Spadora, Valerie Gareth Tidball Blurb: During the late fall of 2015, members of Life Jacket Theatre Company travelled to southern Florida to interview the residents of Miracle Village, a rural community for sex offenders buried deep in sugarcane fields. The team has transformed its research into a moving and unflinching play about darkness, uncertainty, and the painful process of healing in small-town America. This play uses a fusion of personal interviews and found text crafted by Travis Russ, award-winning playwright and director, as well as traditional Methodist hymns and original songs composed and arranged by Priscilla Holbrook, from the band Susan Jane. Life Jacket Theatre Company’s recent production of Gorey: The Secret Lives Of Edward Gorey, was a Critics' Pick by the New York Times and Time Out New York, was nominated for a 2017 Drama Desk Award, seven 2016 New York Innovative Theatre Awards, and two 2017 Henry Hewes Design Awards (granted by the American Theatre Wing). Sponsor: Life Jacket Theater Co. @ HERE Arts Center Cost: $35-$45. Use discount code “2FOR1” to get two tickets for the price of one, good for performances Jan. 30-Feb. 4 only. INFO: http://www.here.org/shows/detail/1927/ http://www.lifejackettheatre.org/america-is-hard-to-see/
You May Be a Sex Offender if…Who gets on the list? Could you, or someone you love, wind up on the list? Type: Live presentation with simultaneous webstream Location: Washington, DC Date: Feb. 8 12:00PM-1:30PM Featuring: Lenore Skenazy, author, columnist, and founder of Free-Range Kids; with comments by Dara Lind, senior reporter for Vox; moderated by Walter Olson, Cato Institute. Blurb: In 1994, responding to a terrible murder, Congress passed a law requiring all 50 states to set up sex offense registries. Now many states closely control where and with whom persons on the registries may live, while public maps showing offenders’ places of residence lead to social shunning and occasional harassment. They also scare parents from letting their children play outside. But does the registry make kids any safer? Lenore Skenazy, the New York newspaper columnist famous for letting her 9-year-old son ride the subway alone and founding the “anti-helicopter parenting” movement, has found that offender maps have helped shape public perceptions of a society rife with child-snatching. That led her to other questions: Who gets on the list? Could you, or someone you love, wind up on the list? How about getting off it? Lenore Skenazy has spoken around the world on the costs of irrational fears of risk to young people and is the president of the new nonprofit dedicated to overthrowing overprotection, Let Grow. Commenting on her remarks will be Vox senior reporter Dara Lind, who has written on how the registry system fits into the wider scheme of criminal justice sanctions and how it may affect recidivism. Sponsor: Cato Institute Cost: Free Webstream: details at link below
Emily Horowitz vs. Marci HamiltonDebate topic: Whether “all the laws requiring those convicted of sex offenses to put their names in a registry should be abolished." Type: Live debate Location: New York City (NoHo) Date: Feb. 12, 2018 6:30PM-8:30PM Sponsor: The Soho Forum Featuring: Emily Horowitz, Marci Hamilton. Moderated by Gene Epstein. Blurb: Debate of the following resolution, “All the laws requiring those convicted of sex offenses to put their names in a registry should be abolished." In favor of the resolution is Emily Horowitz, professor and chair of the sociology and criminal justice department at St. Francis College in Brooklyn, New York, where she founded a program that helps the formerly incarcerated complete college. She serves as a board member for the National Center for Reason and Justice, a national organization that advocates in criminal cases involving those falsely accused and wrongfully convicted of crimes against children, and the Alliance for the Constitutional Reform of Sex Offense Laws, an organization that educates and litigates laws that undermine the civil rights of those convicted of sex offenses and their families. Horowitz is the author of Protecting Our Kids?: How Sex Offender Laws Are Failing Us (2015) and co-editor of Caught in the Web of the Criminal Justice System: Autism, Developmental Disabilities, and Sex Offenses (2017). She has a PhD in sociology from Yale University. Opposed to the resolution is Marci A. Hamilton, Fox Professor of Practice and Fox Family Pavilion Resident Senior Fellow in the Program for Research on Religion in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania. She is also the founder, CEO, and Academic Director of CHILD USA, which is dedicated to interdisciplinary, evidence-based research to prevent child abuse and neglect. The author of God vs. the Gavel: The Perils of Extreme Religious Liberty which was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, Hamilton is also a columnist for Verdict on Justia.com. Her book, Justice Denied: What America Must Do to Protect Its Children advocates the elimination of child sex abuse statutes of limitations. She holds a JD from the University of Pennsylvania School of Law, where she served as Editor-in-Chief of the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Cost: $10-$18
Kids in Cuffs: The Trouble with Teen Sexting LawsJuveniles can actually go to jail for sending or receiving a sext Type: Live panel discussion Location: Austin, TX Date: March 9, 2018 3:30pm-4:30pm Featuring: Emily Horowitz is a sociologist and the author of Protecting Our Kids?: How Sex Offender Laws Are Failing Us (2015). Amy Lawrence works at two care centers: a home for elderly persons, and a safe place for victims of domestic abuse. Emily Yoffe is a contributing editor to The Atlantic, focusing on civil liberties, and has written extensively about campus sexual assault. Robby Soave is an associate editor at Reason.com and writes about college news, education policy, criminal justice reform, and television. Blurb: It's one of the most common parenting nightmares of the 21st century: Finding out your teen swapped inappropriate text messages with a classmate. Unfortunately, outdated laws often make reality even worse--juveniles can actually go to jail for sending or receiving a sext, even though such behavior is ubiquitous among young people. The purpose of this panel is to inform the public about an aspect of criminal justice in desperate need of reform: the law as it relates to teenagers and technology. Sponsor: SXSW (South By Southwest) Festival Cost: Festival registration required |
|
Scarlet letters: In a new essay Guy Hamilton-Smith opens with a wide view of this punishment-crazed country and then comes in for a close-up look at 21st century scarlet letters. The number of people forced to sign the sex offense registry continues to climb and is now close to 900,000. Evidence mounts that registries do not improve public safety or reduce recidivism but cause much damage to the lives of registrants and their kin. Meanwhile lawmakers are pressing for even tougher registration laws and are enacting new registries for non-sex offenses! Pushing back these draconian laws is a huge fight that will take lots of people. Those on the registry are struggling to raise their voices. Who will help them? Hamilton-Smith raises a rarely discussed but important issue, the role of criminal justice reformers in battling the registry. Have a look at his remarkable essay published by In Justice Today. --Bill Dobbs, The Dobbs Wire In Justice Today | Dec. 12, 2017 Sex Registries as Modern-Day Witch Pyres: Why Criminal Justice Reform Advocates Need to Address the Treatment of People on the Sex Offender Registry By Guy Hamilton-Smith Excerpts: More than any other nation on the planet, we rely on incarceration as the fix for our social ills. America's unprecedented prison boom spawned advocates who work tirelessly to put the police state toothpaste back into the tube. For the first time since the data was tracked, state and federal prison populations declined in 2014, albeit slightly, from historic highs. Yet amidst this wave of reform, one group of people continue to languish in the collective "harsher is better" mindset: sex offenders. If America has a civil death penalty, putting people on the sex offender registry is it. In a recent experiment, when individuals were given the choice between being labeled a child molester or dying, most chose death. The numbers of those currently on the registry are staggering, and continue to increase each year. Absent seismic shifts in criminal justice policy, the trend will likely continue. As with witches, the modern-day sex offender largely a creature of our own creation, acting as a sort of repository for many of our collective moral anxiety around sex. While a baked-in ick factor often turns many erstwhile warriors into silent observers, awareness and informed response is badly needed from those within the criminal justice community. Reformers urgently need to draw public attention to the cruel and unnecessarily harsh treatment afforded to sex offenders within the justice system. MORE: |
|
A modest proposal: Miriam Aukerman has a modest proposal for changing Michigan's sex offense registry law, the registry laws in other states and a federal statute (SORNA), too! In a commentary published by The Hill she makes a strong plea for public safety while urging bold changes in how lawmakers – and the public – ought to reckon with sexual wrongdoing. Her perspective is all the more valuable for having convinced a federal appeals court to issue a ground-breaking 2016 decision that did serious damage to Michigan's scarlet letter machinery. The aftershocks from that ruling (Does v. Snyder) are still being felt; she was co-counsel in the case. Aukerman's cogently argued op-ed comes at a time when draconian punishments such as the registry are getting more scrutiny. Let's hope her essay helps reboot the discussion. --Bill Dobbs, The Dobbs Wire The Hill | Oct. 25, 2017 Sex offender registries endanger the lives they're meant to protect By Miriam Aukerman Excerpts: Our communities deserve effective public-safety measures that are based on facts and sound research, not wasteful and counterproductive measures born of fear. We all want to be safe. We have to demand our legislators pass laws that work and actually keep us safe. This month the U.S. Supreme Court left in place a lower court's decision that Michigan's sex offender registry law is so ineffective that it is unconstitutional. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals not only found that Michigan's registry treats those on it as "moral lepers," but also concluded, based on a mountain of evidence, that registries don't keep people safe. As the Court pointed out, registries may actually increase offending and have "at best, no impact on recidivism," probably because they make it so "hard for registrants to get and keep a job, find housing, and reintegrate into their communities." Michigan will have now have to rewrite its unconstitutional registration law. The only moral and logical thing for Michigan — and other states — to do is to abolish the sex offender registry. MORE: |
|
Kentucky win: A federal court judge in Kentucky just struck down two parts of Kentucky's sex offense registration law! Individuals on the registry were banned from using social media, and required to divulge so-called internet identifiers--email addresses and such. Today's ruling overturns both restrictions and strengthens the First Amendment rights of everyone to use the Internet. The Kentucky decision builds on a major US Supreme Court victory (Packingham v. North Carolina) that came in June when the court unanimously ruled unconstitutional a North Carolina law banning registrants from social media. Congratulations and kudos to "John Doe"— a subscriber to The Dobbs Wire— and his legal eagle, Scott White. If you want a copy of the decision drop us a line. Have a look at the Lexington Herald-Leader's report. --Bill Dobbs, The Dobbs Wire Lexington Herald-Leader/Kentucky.com | Oct. 20, 2017 Judge strikes down Kentucky's social media ban for sex offenders By John Cheves Kentucky's registered sex offenders have the constitutional right to use Facebook, Twitter and other online social media, a federal judge ruled Friday. Ruling in a lawsuit brought by a Lexington child pornography defendant identified only as "John Doe," U.S. District Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove struck down Kentucky's sweeping restrictions on Internet access for registered sex offenders. Van Tatenhove cited a unanimous decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in June that struck down a similar North Carolina ban on social media for sex offenders, in part because so many civic institutions — from elected officials to news media — are now tied into social media. “This is a very important decision,” said Scott White, a Lexington attorney who represented Doe. “The laws effectively deprived anyone on the sex offender registry of access to the most effective forms of communication that we have today. It was a complete suppression of speech.” MORE: http://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article179967661.html |
|
Just weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court justices return from summer break a continuing controversy threatens the court's credibility. Did they play fast and loose with the facts in several landmark sex offense cases? A new video that just went live on the New York Times website will tell you plenty, click on the link below. Also below are several stories with more information. --Bill Dobbs, The Dobbs Wire A 'Frightening' Myth About Sex Offenders New York Times Op-Doc by David Feige Our harsh treatment of sex offenders is based on flawed social science See the VIDEO: https://www.nytimes.com/video/opinion/100000005415081/a-frightening-myth-about-sex-offenders.html The Washington Post | March 9, 2017
The big lie about sex offendersBy Radley Balko
Slate | March 7, 2017
The Supreme Court’s Sex-Offender Jurisprudence Is Based on a LieBy David Feige
Washington Post | June 21, 2017
Three Pinocchios: Justice Alito’s misleading claim about sex offender rearrestsNew York Post | March 1, 2017
Do sex offenders have a right to free speech?By Lenore Skenazy
|
|
Dear CCNCR Friends, Due to the catastrophic natural disasters our country is facing, we are cancelling our September call. Our thoughts and prayers are with everyone. Our focus is to assist our family and friends during this horrific time of need. Yours sincerely, CAUTIONclick National Campaign for Reform
|
|
Win in Colorado: A federal judge declared Colorado's sex offense registry law unconstitutional! The court ruled the law is *punishment* and went even farther, finding the law is such severe punishment ("cruel and unusual") that it violates the 8th Amendment. In addition the court found the law fails to deliver constitutionally mandated basic fairness ("due process") and violates the 14th Amendment. For multiple reasons, as applied, the law is unconstitutional. Three individuals are immediately impacted (this was not a class action); the judge has stopped Colorado from enforcing the law against the trio and now they can move on with their lives. There's much more at stake and work to do – over 18,000 are on the Colorado registry – and this ruling provides a roadmap for further legal action. Meanwhile, Colorado officials who operate the state's scarlet letter machinery are not happy. Will they appeal this decision? Stay tuned! Congratulations to all those who stood and fought for their rights, kudos to Denver legal eagle Alison Ruttenberg for a long, successful fight, this challenge began over four years ago. Worth a read: There's much in the opinion about the daily lives of people on the registry and even those who associate with them such as a woman who let a registrant live in her house and, even after he moved out, suffered so much scorn she had to sell the house. Another registrant was not home when police came by for a routine check, he returned home to find a highly visible fluorescent tag put on the front door by police. Jobs lost, apartments refused, lives shattered. At one point the opinion describes such treatment as Kafka-esque. Judge Richard Matsch was appointed to the federal bench in 1974 by Richard Nixon; he has a "law and order" reputation. Below are links to the court's decision, reports from the Denver Post and Westword, and local TV coverage. –Bill Dobbs, The Dobbs Wire
Denver Post | Sept. 1, 2017
Colorado sex offender registration act is unconstitutional, federal judge declares
The judge’s ruling criticized Colorado legislators who claimed that the sex offender act is not punitive
By Kirk Mitchell
Excerpts: A federal judge has ruled that Colorado’s sex offender registration act violates the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. His Thursday ruling says the act was punitive to three sex offenders who sued the state. Matsch found that Colorado’s registration act causes sex offenders and their family members to face a “serious threat of retaliation, violence, ostracism, shaming, and other unfair and irrational treatment from the public, directly resulting from their status as registered sex offenders…”
The judge’s ruling criticized Colorado legislators who claimed that the sex offender act is not punitive. “The register is telling the public — DANGER – STAY AWAY. How is the public to react to this warning? What is expected to be the means by which people are to protect themselves and their children?” Matsch wrote in his ruling.
Technically the judge’s ruling only applies to the three plaintiffs in the case, but it could lead to more universal impact, particularly if the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds the decision on appeal, said Boulder attorney Alison Ruttenberg, the attorney for the three plaintiffs. MORE:
Westword | Sept. 1, 2017
Judge Rules Sex Offender Registry "Cruel and Unusual"
By Alan Prendergast
Excerpts: A veteran federal judge has ruled that Colorado's sex offender registry violates rights of due process and amounts to cruel and unusual punishment. Dated August 31, U.S. District Senior Judge Richard Matsch's scathing opinion applies only to three plaintiffs, all convicted sex offenders, who complained that the registry's requirements had made it difficult for them to find employment and housing and set them up for harassment long after they'd served their prison time. But to the extent that the plaintiffs' experiences mirror those of other felons on the list, the ruling could have far-reaching implications.
Matsch found the "public shaming" and harassment that results from a person's name appearing on the registry to be a form of punitive action beyond the actual sentence for the offense, particularly given the ease with which information now moves from government sites to social media and beyond: "A convicted offender is knowingly placed in peril of additional punishment, beyond that to which he has been sentenced pursuant to legal proceedings and due process, at the random whim and caprice of unknowable and unpredictable members of the public. This risk continues for the entire time a sex offender is on the registry, and perhaps even beyond that if he is fortunate enough to eventually deregister." MORE:
CBS4 Denver/KCNC via YouTube | Aug. 31, 2017Judge: Colorado's Sex Offender Registry Violates Rights (VIDEO)5:00 PM Newscasthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9CSz7ped9410:00 PM Newscasthttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO_Ht1F79AkMillard v. Rankin
U.S. District Court for Colorado, No. 13-02406
Ruling filed Aug. 31, 2017:
KEEP UP THE GOOD FIGHT! |
|
Dear CCNCR friends, This Monday's Monthly Conference Call has been cancelled. Please join us on Monday September 11th at 8pm EST, when we will resume our monthly meetings. All are welcome. Thank You for your continued support. - CCNCR
|
|
Dear CCNCR friends, We are asking your assistance to respond to the USSC's request for public comment. Please contact the USSC and let them know your thoughts on why they should continue their study on CP offenses and federal sentencing. Below is a sample letter, please feel free to share your comments. Email to: pubaffairs@ussc.gov. DEADLINE IS JULY 31ST. |
|
Dear Honorable Pryor; I am contacting you to request continuation of the ussc's work on the proposed 2017-2018 Priorities 82 fr 28381 to support the commissions studies related to child pornography offenses. I ask that the commission consider all aspects of the sentencing on non-production child pornography, including: 1. Lifetime supervised release 2. Commission exclude 18 U.S. C. 2252 (a) from the "crime of violence" definition [YOUR SIGNATURE] [YOUR ADDRESS] Email: pubaffairs@ussc.gov or mail your letter to: U.S. SENTENCING COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs One Columbus Circle, NE Suite 2-500, South Lobby Washington, DC, 20002-800 Email: PubAffairs@ussc.gov |
|
L.A. D.A. Jackie Lacey is among criminal justice leaders calling for abolishing lifetime registry for low risk sexual offenders. Learn more by visiting the LA Times' page: Criminal justice leaders seek to end lifetime registry for low-risk sex ... www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-sex-offender-registry-20170618-story.html |
|
Dear CCNCR friends, Below is a draft developed for us to use as an example for a response to the USSC by as many CCNCR members and family members etc.as possible This is to be done ASAP as March 10th is the deadline to receive such responses. Initially our letters were not on record as having been received but thanks to Sue's diligence in following up, an error was discovered and our letter is NOW included in those received by the USSC. It is important that we get responses out as a quickly as possible and as many as possible. In a quick read of other responses, it is noted in a couple, the position is taken that possession of CP should NOT be removed from the crime of violence status. We do NOT consider possession victim less---actually NO crime is without victims, even pick pocketing! However we must stress that non hands on, non production, in other words no history of sexual contact with children ( the position we have taken all along, ) should NOT be under the crime of violence definition. Our position as stated below, spells this out in somewhat legal terms. If someone wants to adjust their response to add just a few sentences about how meaningful their treatment has been, their tenure of non recidivating, their return to the community, being part of their church, family support, gainful employment, etc. as a personalizing touch, then that could be written in. All written comment should be sent to the Commission by electronic mail or regular mail. The email address for public comment is Public_Comment@ussc.gov(link sends e-mail). Mail address for public comment is United States Sentencing Commission, One Columbus Circle, N.E., Suite 2-500, Washington, D.C. 20002-8002, Attention: Public Affairs. For further information, see the full contents of the official notice published in the Federal Register (available at www.ussc.gov). |
Subject: Re: Public Comment on "First Offender" Proposed Amendment 2017 After reviewing the posted public comments for Proposed Amendment No. 1, I would like to offer a brief comment on the letter submitted by Caution Click (CCNCR). This organization proposes an amendment to U.S.S.G. §5D1.2(b) to include a policy statement recommending the imposition of the minimum mandatory term of 5 years supervised release for "first offenders" convicted of a non-production child pornography offense who have no history of sexual contact with children. I agree with CCNCR to amend the current policy statement because it is consistent with the Commission's empirical conclusions regarding recidivism rates of "first offenders" and child pornography offenders. The Commission has previously noted a need to amend this policy statement as the average supervised release sentences for child pornography offenders are exceeding 20 years. CCNCR also suggests amending U.S.S.G. §4B1.2 Commentary to specifically exclude 18 U.S.C. 2252(a) from the "crime of violence" definition. Given the inconsistencies within the Guidelines Manual, the "crime of violence" definition within the United States Code, the plain statutory language of 18 U.S.C. §2252(a), and the Supreme Courts' decisions, I agree with the opinions expressed by CCNCR and support the exclusion of 18 U.S.C. §2252(a) to the Commission's "crime of violence" definition. Thank you for the opportunity to offer comment. Respectfully, Please include your name and address |
|
Alliance for Constitutional Sex Offense Laws, formerly CA RSOL, is planning a conference in Los Angeles, CA on June 16 and 17, 2017. We are featuring Emily Horowitz, PhD, author of PROTECTING OUR KIDS? How Sex Offender Laws Are Failing Us. We are also proud to have Catherine Carpenter, Janice Bellucci, and many other notables presenting. The conference will take place at Southwestern Law School at their beautiful, fully restored, art deco building. We extend an invitation to come and join us in June! Further information will be posted on the ACSOL website all4consolaws.org |
|
Great communication is the key to understanding. This is especially important when the issue that one needs to communicate is of a sensitive and unpopular nature. As we try to make members of congress understand and empathize with the injustices that we all suffer, we must find the most effective way to do so. The Anatomy of a Good Letter to Congress, by Rachna Choudhry, explains in detail the steps that should be taken in order to write a letter to congress that hopefully will move our elected officials to take positive action to find a solution to the unjust ordeal that so many suffer. Link: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/anatomy-good-letter-congress-rachna-choudhry |
|
In a significant panel ruling today, the Sixth Circuit has concluded in Does v. Snyder, No. 15-1536 (6th Cir. Aug. 25, 2016) (available here) that Michigan's amendments to its Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA) "imposes punishment" and thus the state violates the US Constitution when applying these SORA provisions retroactively. Here is some of the concluding analysis from the unanimous panel decision reaching this result: So, is SORA's actual effect punitive? Many states confronting similar laws have said "yes." See, e.g., Doe v. State, 111 A.3d 1077, 1100 (N.H. 2015); State v. Letalien, 985 A.2d 4, 26 (Me. 2009); Starkey v. Oklahoma Dep't of Corr., 305 P.3d 1004 (Okla. 2013); Commonwealth v. Baker, 295 S.W.3d 437 (Ky. 2009); Doe v. State, 189 P.3d 999, 1017 (Alaska 2008). And we agree. In reaching this conclusion, we are mindful that, as Smith makes clear, states are free to pass retroactive sex-offender registry laws and that those challenging an ostensibly non-punitive civil law must show by the "clearest proof" that the statute in fact inflicts punishment. But difficult is not the same as impossible. Nor should Smith be understood as writing a blank check to states to do whatever they please in this arena. A regulatory regime that severely restricts where people can live, work, and "loiter," that categorizes them into tiers ostensibly corresponding to present dangerousness without any individualized assessment thereof, and that requires time-consuming and cumbersome in-person reporting, all supported by — at best — scant evidence that such restrictions serve the professed purpose of keeping Michigan communities safe, is something altogether different from and more troubling than Alaska's first-generation registry law. SORA brands registrants as moral lepers solely on the basis of a prior conviction. It consigns them to years, if not a lifetime, of existence on the margins, not only of society, but often, as the record in this case makes painfully evident, from their own families, with whom, due to school zone restrictions, they may not even live. It directly regulates where registrants may go in their daily lives and compels them to interrupt those lives with great frequency in order to appear in person before law enforcement to report even minor changes to their information. We conclude that Michigan's SORA imposes punishment. And while many (certainly not all) sex offenses involve abominable, almost unspeakable, conduct that deserves severe legal penalties, punishment may never be retroactively imposed or increased. Indeed, the fact that sex offenders are so widely feared and disdained by the general public implicates the core countermajoritarian principle embodied in the Ex Post Facto clause. As the founders rightly perceived, as dangerous as it may be not to punish someone, it is far more dangerous to permit the government under guise of civil regulation to punish people without prior notice. Such lawmaking has "been, in all ages, [a] favorite and most formidable instrument[] of tyranny." The Federalist No. 84, supra at 444 (Alexander Hamilton). It is, as Justice Chase argued, incompatible with both the words of the Constitution and the underlying first principles of "our free republican governments." Calder, 3 U.S. at 388–89; accord The Federalist No. 44, supra at 232 (James Madison) ("[E]x post facto laws . . . are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation."). The retroactive application of SORA's 2006 and 2011 amendments to Plaintiffs is unconstitutional, and it must therefore cease. I was involved with some amicus briefing in this case, so I am a bit biased when saying I think the Sixth Circuit got this one right. But I do not think I am showing any bias when asserting this ruling is a big deal (and could become an even bigger deal if Michigan seeks a further appeal to the full Sixth Circuit or to the US Supreme Court). |
|
This video documents the July 27th 2016 protest against the unjust, immoral and unconstitutional International Megan's Law held in Oakland, CA. |
|
As we fight for justice and compassion to prevail, it is reassuring to find that others are taking notice of the same issues we are tirelessly working to correct.
Please take a moment to read and share the following articles. |
Join California RSOL in protesting International Megan's Law (IML), the law to prevent Registrant international travel, at the U.S. District Court in Oakland, California, July 27, 2016. The government has filed a motion to dismiss our lawsuit against IML, the recently signed law by President Obama, to keep Registered citizens in permanent internal exile. The court hearing for that motion will be at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom Three of Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton, 3rd Floor, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California, 94612. We need as many of our supporters to fill the courtroom as possible to show the court, and America, that there are many Registrants, families of Registrants, and friends who suffer under the yoke of unconstitutional, ex-post-facto, punishment. The government’s travel notifications to foreign countries, its “unique identifiers” placed upon the passports of Registrants, as well as its requirements that Registrants provide the U.S. Government advance travel plans – under threat of imprisonment – amount to a complete ban on international travel for those on the Registry. These policies are already taking a terrible toll on those who, long ago, paid their debts to society. The Registry has become a continuously expanding regime of ever-escalating torment. After the hearing, which will probably end by 10:00 a.m., there will be a rally in the plaza immediately outside of the courtroom in front of the entrance. We expect to have media covering the event and Janice Bellucci, President of RSOL, and lead attorney for the lawsuit, will speak, along with other members and supporters of RSOL. Please join us there! If you cannot, then please consider donating to California RSOL to help make our work in challenging this, and many other terrible laws, such as residence and presence restrictions, possible. Please also consider volunteering your time. Thank you for your support! Please contact us at californiarsol.org with your questions or concerns or offers of assistance. When: July 27, Hearing at 9:00 a.m., The rally begins at approximately 10:00 a.m. in the plaza in front of Court entrance. Where: U.S. Federal District Courtroom 3, Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton, 3rd Floor, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California, 94612 |
 |
I have an urgent call to action! I have received so many calls from families along with letters from inmates and concerned citizens about the horrific conditions and abuse happening behind the razor wire.
This is unacceptable to all of us! I am asking all of you who have a loved one inside to write to me at the address below. I want true stories, I want ideas for solutions. I then want to send this packet to
Governor Nathan Deal and Commissioner Homer Bryson
|
We are forming a voter bloc and we need all of you to join!
NIA Launch ~ February 29, 2016 ~
8:30am
Central Presbyterian Church
201 Washington Street SW, Atlanta, GA, 30303
Click the photo below for more details. |
|
Dear CCNCR friend,
Paul Rigney urgently requests that everyone please help with the following:
1. Everyone, call and have others call The Speakers office THIS Monday morning. 202-225-600, 202-225-3031.
David: We need to tell them that they must not vote on H.R. 515 under RULES OF SUSPENSION because the bill received an amendment from the Senate that is SUBSTANTIVE and HISTORIC. (U.S. passports have never been branded with criminal convictions of citizens before)
I would like to see 500 phone calls. Please put this up on Affiliates websites. Lets leave hundreds of messages on 202-225-0600 for them to sort through Monday morning
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
(202) 225-0600
2. Spread Josh Graven’s petition that should go directly to their representative.
3.. Send people to https://www.change.org/p/u-s-house-of-representatives-vote-against-hr-515
4. For those with Twitter accounts, tweet this , “Are you familiar with International Megan’s #Law, or IML? http://ow.ly/WITZv” sends to David Post’s article. Also, please TWEET the following image and message which can be found here (simply right-click and save the image to your hard drive and then insert it, along with the text message, into new Tweets): https://twitter.com/IndividLiberty/status/691870334220423168
Also, you could help further by re-tweeting Tweets already sent to House members which have been sent from that Twitter account.
5. Continue to call and email congressional members.
6. Contact media outlets with the attached Banner
Paul Rigney
Registrant Travel Action Group, Inc
Dear CCNCR Friends,
Please take the time to watch Galen Baughman's TED Talk:
First time a sex offender took a TED stage.
First TED talk on adolescent sexuality, the registry, indefinite detention, sexting.
Let's make it the first to 100,000 views in a month!
Share the link:
Galen Baughman
Soros Justice Fellow
Human Rights Defense Center
11 Dupont Circle, NW
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 681-8121
Open Society Foundations Q&A Profile
Affiliates mailing list
Dear CCNCR friends,
http://www.house.gov/representatives/
Suggested dialogue:
Hi, my name is ________ and I am a constituent of Representative _______. I live in (city or town) and would like to ask that (he/she) vote against H.R. 515 under the new title: "International Megan's Law to Prevent Child Exploitation and Other Sexual Crimes through Advanced Notification of Traveling Sex Offenders" and associated Senate Amendment 2936 known as the Corker amendment.
HR 515 is expensive, violates provisions of the U.S. Constitution and does nothing to reduce sex trafficking or enhance the safety of either U.S. or foreign citizens.
You may also have your voices heard by leaving a message on your representative's website, Facebook and Twitter sites.
This is the statement that was posted on POP Vox by Safer Virginia:
1. The bill wastes $12,000,000 and fails to reduce sexual re-offenses, as it purports.
2. The bill disregards available research, attempting to reduce sex trafficking by targeting registered sex offenders. There is no evidence that registrants have been, or are likely to be, involved in sex trafficking. Traffickers are more likely to be politicians, local law enforcement, businessmen or restaurateurs.
3. The bill creates an unnecessary bureaucracy to alert foreign governments of travel plans of registered sex offenders. Those governments already have Internet access to every online U.S. sex offender registry.
4. Only 18 countries even have sex offender registries. There is no evidence that those convicted of sex offenses in foreign countries are attempting to enter the U.S. to engage in sex trafficking.
5. The U.S. government is already disseminating its citizens' criminal histories to foreign governments that are then denying entry to citizens holding valid U.S. passports.
6. The bill targets international travel of registered sex offenders who live, work and travel freely across the U.S. They do not pose significant public safety risk to U.S. society or to citizens of foreign countries.
7. The bill is expensive, needless and does nothing to reduce sex trafficking or enhance the safety of either U.S. or foreign citizens. At the same time, it increases risk to U.S. citizens and causes significant collateral damage to anyone traveling with a registered sex offender.
Dear CCNCR friends,
Here is an opportunity to voice your Opposition to HR 515
GO TO
ANDPlace your VOTE!
H.R. 515 INTERNATIONAL MEGAN'S LAW TO PREVENT DEMAND FOR CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING
Dear CCNCR friends,
As the year comes to an end, we'd like to take this opportunity to look back on what we have accomplished to advance our mission in 2015, to set our goals for 2016, and to share with you how we have utilized your generous donations toward our goals. Most importantly, we value YOUR feedback and look forward to your input during the coming year.
As always, Thank You for your continuous support.
Dear CCNCR friends,
We are currently looking for a non Production CP offender who would consider being a plaintiff in a lawsuit challenging the California registry. The suit can be filed under a pseudonym, protecting the plaintiff from public disclosure of his identify. We already have other plaintiffs with different profiles, but we would like to include a plaintiff who is on the registry for possession/receipt/distribution of CP. The suit will be brought pro bono by a major California law firm, at no charge to the plaintiff.
The plaintiff must currently be on the California registry. It does not matter where they were convicted, or whether the conviction was state or federal, so long as they are currently listed on the California registry. The plaintiff should be someone who is not currently incarcerated and has not had other offenses beside the CP possession. The ideal plaintiff would have been released for at least a few years; more is better.
If you can identify someone who you have confirmed may be willing to serve as such a plaintiff, please provide their contact information, and they will be contacted by the law professor who is organizing this suit, who can provide more information.
Please respond to this email ASAP and your contact information will be forwarded.
Gail and Bruce educating and spreading the word about CCNCR and our work with the attorneys at the national NACDL SEX OFFENDER CONFERENCE in Las Vegas.
Dear CCNCR friends,
We are urging you to respond to the USSC'S request for public comment on a proposed amendment to revise the "crime of violence" definition.
Written Public Comment regarding the proposed amendment should be received by the Commission no later than November 12, 2015. Public comment should be sent to the Commission by electronic mail or regular mail.
Below is a sample letter you may wish to use. Please remember to sign your name, date and provide return address information.
We are urging REGULAR MAIL (volume counts) and to get as many family and friends to respond to ASAP. Electronic mail is acceptable. Click on the link below:
United States Sentencing Commission
One Columbus Circle, N.E. Suite 2-500
Washington, D.C. 20002-8002
Attention: Public Affairs
Before the deadline of NOVEMBER 12, 2015.
Public comment should be sent to the Commission by electronic mail or regular mail. The email address for public comment is:
(please note the underscore between public and comment)
Sample Letter
United States Sentencing Commission
One Columbus Circle, N.E. Suite 2-500
Washington, DC 20002-8002
Attention: Public Affairs
Re: Proposed Amendment to Section 4B1.2 of the Sentencing Guidelines, "Crime of Violence" Definition
To Whom it May Concern:
In response to request for public comment, I am writing this letter to share my personal belief that possession of child pornography should be excluded from the definition of a "forcible sex offense". Non production possession, receipt, transportation or distribution of child pornography does not meet the criteria of being a sexual act or of having sexual contact. Therefore it should be excluded as a violent sexual act.
Using the classification of violent offender placing the offender under the same label as someone who has had sexual contact with a child distorts the truth and is at the very least misguided. (If you wish to include a BRIEF PERSONAL STORY- we suggest two to three sentences).
We are all passionate about protecting our children however, we have taken this passion to a level where we are applying a definition that does not fit the crime and using this to perpetuate a life time of punishment. Therefore, I would like this letter to be entered as public comment to item 4 (D) in the "Issues for Comment" section of the United States Sentencing Commission proposal to amend Section 4B1.2(a)(2) of the sentencing guidelines.
Sincerely,
Your Name
Return Address
Dear Members and Advocates:
It’s Official! The Florida Action Committee has filed suit against Seminole County, challenging the proximity ordinance! A second county is about to get sued over their proximity ordinance as well and we will announce that one after it is filed.
The ordinance prevents registrants from being present or traveling through an “exclusion zone”, making it practically (if not literally) impossible to make it from one end of the county to the other or perform routine tasks, such as banking, visiting family and friends, grocery shopping or the countless other perfectly lawful activities citizens do in their daily lives, without violating the ordinance. Similar ordinances have been struck down elsewhere and we are hopeful for a similar result here.
We are incredibly grateful to the members who have stepped up to help us get this lawsuit going and who have made contributions to our legal fund, enabling us to take on our next challenge. We are more than incredibly grateful to the Florida Institutional Legal Services Project for taking on the proximity ordinances. It takes the help and contribution of all of us to make these accomplishments happen and it’s certainly exciting to watch us move forward.
With the added workload, we are actively seeking additional volunteers to help us accomplish more goals. If you have a few hours a week to dedicate to the fight, are able to use the internet and communicate freely and have a strong desire to help effectuate change, please contact anita@floridaactioncommittee.org and find out how you can help.
Let’s keep up the momentum!
The Florida Action Committee Team
Here are some headlines from this week:
FAC Sues Seminole County, Florida over Sex Offender Exclusion Zones Ordinance
LAKE MONROE, FLORIDA – September 9, 2015 The Florida Action Committee (FAC) has sued Seminole County and its Sheriff over the County’s proximity ordinance, which prohibits...
They check in but they don’t check out.
The title to this article can be a paraphrase of an old Eagles song or the tagline for a Raid commercial, but unfortunately this saying isn't being applied to bugs, but to human...
The Sex Offender Stigma – how it sells a story
An interesting example of the sex offender label being used to "sell stories" We regularly scan news headlines across the state (and in other states) to find news stories that...
Florida Attorney General Admits that Thousands of Rape Kits Went Untested
While the state has millions of dollars to spend on passing and enforcing feel-good, do-nothing, ineffective sex offender laws to punish those they "think might commit an...
Dear CCNCR Friends,
We are urging each and every one to contact the United States Sentencing Commission requests for public comment on child pornography offenses. Deadline is July 27, 2015.
The importance of QUANTITY is essential to influence the USSC to place our issue as a priority. Please get family, friends and anyone who is interested to send a letter or email ASAP.
NUMBERS COUNT. WE NEED YOUR LETTERS TO HAVE OUR VOICES HEARD.
Letters should include a brief personal story about a son, father, brother, friend or neighbor. Explain how their life has been impacted by lengthy sentences, labeling and stringent supervised release and/or registration requirements. Keep your response to no more than ONE page.
You may wish to address one or two talking points:
> USSC's report from 2012 showed there should be a different way to address non production CP offenders
> Enhancements for use of a computer should no longer be valid
> The Butner Study is an outlier. The Butner Study is NOT a Recidivism study and continues to impact sentences. Other studies have not duplicated the findings
> Research shows this population does well in the community with an extremely low recidivism rate of less than 5%
> Lack of empirical research to support sentencing and supervised release guidelines
It is to be addressed to:
United States Sentencing Commission
One Columbus Circle
NE Suite 2-500, South Lobby
Washington, DC 20002-8002
ATTENTION: Public Affairs Priorities Comment
OR
Email address is: pubaffairs@ussc.gov
DEADLINE IS JULY 27, 2015
The 2015 Annual National Seminar on the Federal Sentencing Guidelines will be presented by the United States Sentencing Commission September 16-18th in New Orleans, Louisiana. Sessions on child pornography and sex offenses will be presented.
The 34th Annual Research and Treatment Conference by ATSA will be held in Montreal, Quebec, Canada on October 14-17th. "Quality Research is the foundation of effective assessment, treatment, management, policy and prevention strategies. ATSA supports the development of new knowledge and the translation of existing research into evidence-based practices."
These are valuable opportunities for CAUTIONclick National Campaign for Reform to promote public safety and smarter legislation which relies on evidence based practice and study rather than misinformation and myths.Dr. Kline, Forensic Psychologist, possesses the training and experience to ensure effective exposure, partnerships, and alliances to bring our issues to the forefront to impact change at the national level. We are grateful to have this opportunity to have Dr. Kline represent CCNCR at the USSC seminar and have Gail Colletta, President/CEO of CCNCR to attend the ATSA conference.
This is a critical moment for CCNCR. We cannot do this alone. Undertaking these challenges can be costly BUT necessary to get our voices heard. We are asking for your donations to make this happen. We are estimating a cost of $7000 for the USSC seminar and $2500 for Gail to attend the ATSA conference. Both events will promote networking and provide opportunities to share empirical research which can help shape our laws. We want all sex offender legislation to be based on FACTS.
Please give what you can.
United in reform,
| Gail Colletta | Rita Finley | David Valentine |
| President, CEO | Secretary | Treasurer |
Also, our facebook page for the film (https://www.facebook.com/AnUnspokenLaw) is now live. The same goes for our Twitter feed (https://twitter.com/anunspokenlaw). Please be sure to Like and Follow us! We want these spaces not only to provide updates on the films, but also become a forum for conversation and education.