@ Gerald
I agree with the part about hoping for some new guidelines by the end of the year….I can’t help wondering if those new pieces of legislation ARE being worked on and that’s why the Aclu hasn’t filed that class action yet. My attorney advised me to let Aclu do all the leg work and just let it play out….after 25 yrs of this though it’s hard to be patient…

To Josh
I’m sure it’s going to be similar to what happened with the change in Romeo and Juliet cases. The law changed, but they left it up to each individual offender to petition the court for removal from the sex offender registry. Early on in the Does v Snyder decision, the Attorney General did issue instructions to prosecutors not to go after people who violate a retroactive part of SORA. But who wants to end up sitting in jail as a test case? I am hoping they will issue new guidelines later this year.

This is what I keep trying to tell everyone. What is the definition of insanity?? Yeah, I think we all know that by now. So then, why do we continue to find relief in the same system that caused the burden to begin with? Why would they admit that they are wrong? It’s like a 19th century slave going to his master asking him if he would relieve him of the burdens that he himself placed on him. I don’t understand what makes us think that playing by the rules of THEIR system and THEIR laws is going to give us any relief at all. And if we do get any small victories, it takes years and years to even get the ball rolling. And then the rulers of the system, just drag things out and prolong our misery under the current rules/laws that are in place that they make us obligated to abide by……maybe it’s just time to change the rules and change the system. Think outside the box. Put pressure on these people, take away their money source, etc.. Good places to start.

To Gerald,
That memo is certainly interesting….be interested to see the reaction from the person doing the quarterly verification if you waved that in their face…definitely going to forward that to my attorney

@joeM
@gerald
There was one case that made the news from the east side of Michigan recently about a DA dropping charges against a guy for improper vehicle/plates and not living where he said he was supposed to…or something to that effect. the DA’s reason for dropping the case was because of the Does v Snyder ruling…things do seem to have changed…I didn’t get a personal visit from local police this year so far and my registration date was changed to conviction date not the 1995 date when michigan’s registry went active…my conviction predated Michigan’s passage of the registry by almost a year…long answer short…I don’t really see much difference but I have experienced very little hassle over my status the last 25 years so I’ve been luckier than most.

People commonly believe that conservative judges are more likely to be tough on crime and on criminals. However, in recent years, it has been the conservative Justices on the Supreme Court who have been cracking down on State government over-reach and abuse of individual citizen’s rights. I hope that they feel that this is finally the time to address the fact that the sex offender registries don’t really protect anyone, and serve only to create an entire class of outcasts from society. I will keep my fingers crossed.

To Josh. This is the only official writing I’ve been able to find online about Does v Snyder: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/corrections/DOM_2018-23_SORA_609801_7.pdf
They are supposed to be working on completely rewriting the law. They probably won’t publish any guidelines until that is done. I know that parolees in Bay City have been told that your registry requirements are determined by the date of your conviction offense. However, the parole agents have also been instructed not to volunteer any help for people who were convicted before the registry existed and want to know how to be removed from the registry.

Josh, are people being arrested for “violating” the voided laws?