Comments on: Pennsylvania attorney questions effectiveness of registry

By: Saddles

Saddles — Thu, 14 Nov 2024 15:19:51 +0000

This effectiveness should be question by many lawyers as the whole principle of the registry is not right. its like putting evil for good and good for evil and putting bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.Those in authority want to justify their actions that compound others caught up in this trap by using their wrongful actions.
Sure ever lawyer has their own opinions about this registry and lawyers hate to lose but its truth and fairness that play an important part in this registry ruse. Plea deals are just a compromise and I’m sure those in authority don’t tell you the whole truth. So can authorities really justify their actions when they use a negative to seek a positive result for their actions.

By: ConcernedPfr

ConcernedPfr — Tue, 12 Nov 2024 05:12:01 +0000

In reply to tearfuleagle. and the worst part is that these days, some crimes that would put you on the registry, would be able to be at least lowered to a misdemeanor such as "contributing to the delinquency".

By: tearfuleagle

tearfuleagle — Tue, 12 Nov 2024 01:30:41 +0000

In reply to CherokeeJack. I agree I would not have taken a plea way back in the Mid 90's if I had know i would have had to deal with all this.

By: CherokeeJack

CherokeeJack — Mon, 11 Nov 2024 19:03:54 +0000

Also, many of us were put on the registry retro-actively, after we already made a plea, which could have changed our sentencing if we had that to bargain with.

Also we were given a path off the registry so if you have not committed another crime, it should be automatic, instead of hiring a lawyer and possibly being denied, for no reason other than the judge says so.

Every crime, including murder states people can be rehabilitated, except of course, those with a sex crime in their past. Who gets to decide that?

Appreciate that attorneys concern for us, but the law makers are who should be ending this nonsense.