Contained in the Criminal Justice Meeting Packet was a one-pager from FDLE with their recommended amendments to the registry. Their suggestions included allowing registration of vehicle changes and addresses online through the Cyber Communication Portal.
SB234 does incorporate the vehicles, but not the addresses. Allowing address changes to be made online makes sense because (1) it would not require a separate trip to the sheriff’s office (sometimes requiring hours of time and taking additional time off work) to notify of a brief trip, and (2) it would afford people the opportunity to report within required time frames when their local police departments are closed (most are closed for periods longer than 48 hours).
A copy of the proposed changes can be found here: FDLE – Talking Points
They want to make their jobs easier that’s all they care about.
Registries of all kinds are illegal and constitutionally unlawful full stop.
CherokkeeJack:
We need to document any “fees” they charge. Which jurisdictions are charging a fee, for what and how much?
If you have any court cases finding these fees legal, it would be appreciated if you share them.
You would have to ask FAC. Last year on here a few people reported their counties charged a registration fee. I also think I saw FAC type on here that they were ruled constitutionally allowed. Luckily for now anyway, where I go there is no fee to register.
So do you think anyone in the Senate or House is actually going to listen? If we take senator books new build to with logical conclusion or should I say the logical conclusion if someone like Grady Judd interpreting it, sex offenders will essentially have the probation condition of maintaining a driving log imposed on them in a manner of speaking. Of course the difference is every time you have an entry in your driving log, you have to go to the sheriffs department to submit it in person.We know that law-enforcement is doing this for selfish reasons. They won’t be able to keep up with the new workload and if one sex offender goes off the reservation, it’s bad press for days and no excuse will be acceptable.
Meanwhile, LE opposes a federal gun registry because it violates the right to privacy among other things. But it’s ok to violate our privacy rights with a sex offender registry. The hypocrisy is overwhelming.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrat-gun-registry-police-concerns
Dear FAC, does this change anything with internet identifiers? I am creating a business from home that will require website(s) for sales and contact information. But I’m not sure about the status of the internet identifier case and if I need to register my website at all or when I buy a site or when it goes live. Please help. Thanks
This has no impact on internet identifiers.
Thanks for the response. So did we win the internet identifier case? Do I still need to register a business website(s)?
We won. We don’t unless you use it for direct person to person non-business communications.
Business internet identifiers are not subject to registration. Not unless one also uses them for social communication.
Dear FAC and Jacob, thank you very much for answering my questions (and all other efforts).
Somebody had better tell that to the Pinellas County sheriffs office. When did this decision come down? Have we had any interpretation on using the email for your business website to get on a social media site for the purpose of selling your goods or services? Thinking of Instagram In particular. If you had a separate business email address would you have to register that address? It’s kind of critical that we know ahead of time instead of having to find out as a result of being arrested and prosecuted and winning in court. Remember that even an arrest is a loss for a sex offender under current Florida law.
FAC, I recall you dealt with a similar issue in Duval, where they were unfamiliar with internet registration protocol (resulting from your win).
Duval registration office had a sign listing too many identifiers that needed to be registered, someone sent you a photo of that sign, and you sent Duval a letter. I could have imagined this, though.
Yes, that did happen.
So anyone in Pinellas who has evidence that they’re requiring registration of non-social internet identifiers, might want to forward that evidence to FAC’s Legal Committee.
As a result of FAC’s win in the Internet Identifier Challenge in 2016, registrants are to provide internet identifiers used for direct user-to-user social communication. Not identifiers that are strictly business, not postings on news sites, etc.
I don’t mean to speak for FAC on their own platform, but that’s what I’m noticing in this discussion topic. FAC is free to correct me or clarify.
So an Instagram for business only is ok to be used without registering it under FACs win in the internet identifiers case? Where can I find that case? Can FAC provide more guidance on this please?
https://floridaactioncommittee.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/II-Case-Order.pdf
The following is a direct quote from an 11th Circuit opinion: “. A username need not be registered based only on a communication whose primary purpose is to facilitate a commercial transaction involving goods or services, or a communication over a website whose primary purpose is the dissemination of news, or a communication with a governmental entity. And a username need not be registered based only on its use on a website or application that does not allow users to create web pages or profiles as described in the statute. For the most part, the summary set out in the preceding paragraph derives from the plain language of the statute.” Delgado v. Swearngen, 375 F.Supp.3d 1251 (11th Cir. 2018).”
Referencing the ‘FDLE-Talking Points’, the last statement is the KICKER!
It is all about money and budgets!
‘They’ will still get ‘Their’ Donut and Coffee Breaks and Continue to steal from the American Taxpayer!
Surprised the FDLE is suggesting something good for a change.
I’m pretty sure the decision to put out of state and dead people on the Florida’s registry was actually the FDLE’s decision rather than the legislature’s. I’ve never seen anything in Florida statutes that actually says “Registrants shall not be removed when they leave Florida” or “Registrants shall not be removed from the Florida registry for a year after they die.”
WHY don’t they require violent offenders to report personal information? Or is America in love with violence and blood but gets negatively emotional by the word ‘sex’?
Truly pathetic. People in this country really need to get their priorities straight.
My only question is, How do we get a reciept or proof we did so online? A great fix if it is done properly,but if it for some reason doesn’t take and you think it did, you would be in jail faster than my Grandfather cutting the cheese after Taco Tuesdays.
Use the print screen option on your computer keyboard or make a video recording of your online registration/changes if you think that kind of proof is needed.
Just Sayin,Yeah, we will be in jail with high bail, oh at least we could hope for the 12 months we spent in jail waiting trial maybe get some sort of compensation.
Screenshots are sufficient proof. I take screenshots and archive them for every change I make in the online system.
You can also email yourself the screen shot and it will be archived on email server in case you’re computer crashes.
Even if it comes back undeliverable. The email is there that you sent on the server
I screenshot all of my changes, but I still worry. Provided that I remember to do it each time and that I archive the screenshots reliably, they can still become lost or damaged on my end. If I keep those archives on an electrical storage device, that device could be taken by LE during an arrest for failure to report the changes. It’s also possible that my screenshots would not be accepted as proof of my compliance with reporting, since they can by fabricated by a savvy graphic artist. Or LE might even suggest that I made the change at one time but then removed the update at a later time. Also, if I didn’t have a PC or cell phone, and made my updates from a library computer (provided the library allowed me to enter in the first place), it might be a lot harder to get a picture of the screen.
You write, among other hypotheticals: “that device could be taken by LE during an arrest for failure to report the changes.” How?
Curious
There is a difference between what law enforcement is “Allowed” to do, and what they get away with. I worked in law enforcement in the 1980s and the “line” was crossed a lot by cops who thought in their heads that they were above the law and who is going to question or tell on another cop, culture.
For years officers got away with crap. There was no social media back then. But even now, dirty cops get away with a lot, especially when it comes to those on the registry. Their mentality is “Who they gonna believe, a decorated officer, or some sick sex offender”? Cover it up and sweep it under the rug.
For example, cops suspect that I have been using a messaging service, but they don’t see the URL or name of service and Internet identifier disclosed on the FDLE website. My laptop might contain proof that I visited that site or used that service. So, taking any Internet devices might be part of an arrest warrant. Though I don’t have first-hand experience, I see that happen on TV and in movies all the time.
“I see that happen on TV and in movies all the time.” Theres a big difference between what you see in movies and TV shows versus legal situations in real life. We don’t need to spread fear based on something someone sees fictionalized on TV or in movies. Theres enough of that already. We need real world examples in this forum.
Well if fdle wanted people to add and delete addresses on line. Wiat untill the demand increases from this new pice of legislation.
Better recommendations purging the registry of the deceased those who do not live or no longer live in Florida or those who’s convictions pre date the registry that would be a step in the right direction
They make money off those numbers.
Yes they do…btw would this be a good time to give a status update on our Out Of State Challenge?
Yes – stay tuned for this week’s update. The preview is it’s been funded and will be filed by summer.
Respectfully Called ‘JAG FUNDS’, aka, ‘EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANT GRANT’,,,
THIS IS THE SOURCE WHERE ALL THE MONIES FOR SORNA ARE GENERATED……
THIS IS THE CUSP THAT ALLOCATES FUNDS FOR THOSE THAT ARE FORCED TO REGISTER….
THIS IS WHERE IT ALL HAPPENS….IT IS LIKE THE FEDERAL RESERVE FOR THOSE FORCED TO REGISTER…….
Truth
That is also why some registration locations CHARGE registrants a registration fee each time they go in to make a change or register. AND the damn courts have found it legal to do so. SO being charged financially to register for a crime we committed and are no longer on probation for, for LIFE is not punishment???????
The supreme court needs to stop smoking crack
Totally agree, should be removed from registration, when time is served or dead people.
Is there any reason to hope they would adopt the recommendations. From the FDLE.
Or is this magical thinking?
One of them has been incorporated into the bill. The other was not.
Thanks,
I think we understand that, but that was not the question.
So would this wipe out ALL in-person registration other than:
Initial
Semi-ann./ quarterly
Internet-restricted persons
Did I forget anything?
This was their recommendations. The Senate did not adopt the online address reporting into their bill.
I can’t believe anyone in the legislature would care what FDLE thinks in regards to making anything easier on registrants. Pretty sure half the point of making so many insane requirements is to ensure rearrest.
Having the online option is a better idea than in person reporting… If said individual isn’t on probation with no internet access being part of the standard probation requirements…
If anything, the Ex Post Facto suit IS having a few positive effects. Or… This could be a result of the ongoing pandemic. Either way, these modifications would benefit many IF the suggestion doesn’t fall in willfully deaf ears.
Since science shows that the public registry is a useless piece of feel good law that politicians use to make themselves appear “tough on crime” God willing it’s just a matter of time (too much time) until the courts begin overturning the registry laws, especially with groups like FAC & NARSOL working to get that science out to the public and the politicians.
But is it really? Only a matter of time? I don’t think it is.
I think things will continue to get worse as the USA continues to circle the drain and everyone wants to scapegoat to blame.
It’s always worked in the past and will even more so in today’s “woke” society where you are simply cancelled we were early victims of that stupid attitude.
Make one mistake and it’s game over. Hell, just get accused and it’s game over these days!
Sex O Truth
I agree. Actually I think it will take for more than 50% of America to be on the registries for real change to happen. Imagine a World where registered sex offenders are the majority.
When we are the majority, we can run for president. We can become judges and overturn the registry once and for all. This will all happen in the year 2199.
I agree, registries are here to stay. Our best hope is to make it long enough to apply to get off when our time comes. However, just because we are eligible, does not mean a judge will agree. I have gone 30 years now since my incident but that is no guarantee I will be granted relief.
With all the every increasingly harder laws to follow, it is only a matter of time before we are all in prison for life. Heck why not just buy a huge plat of land and make sex offender city. They can build a 100 foot wall around us and lock us in and air lift supplies once a month…………………………………..Hoorah!
It seems to me that FDLE is trying to work around some of the problems legislators have made with the registration laws. Tacit acknowledgement of the problems.
I agree. I am just wondering what happened all of a sudden for them to recommend changes..
The lawsuit
If adopted, our In-Person Reporting Challenge would be won without firing another shot, no?
Or were those complaints rolled into Ex Post Facto Plus? That one raises SO many more grounds, does it not?
Correct on IN PERSON, we were arguing for that.
More like laziness.