Comments on: Second Amended Complaint filed in Does v. Swearingen (Ex Post Facto Plus Case)

By: Florida Action Committee

Florida Action Committee — Thu, 26 Dec 2019 11:22:46 +0000

In reply to Expostisafacto. There is a thermometer on out site. We are about halfway there.

By: Will Allen

Will Allen — Wed, 25 Dec 2019 03:29:05 +0000

Wow. That is some filing!

By: Expostisafacto

Expostisafacto — Wed, 25 Dec 2019 02:14:33 +0000

In reply to Florida Action Committee. FAC, Can you give us a hint as to whether we've reached (or come close to) the 5K target yet?

By: anne grant

anne grant — Tue, 24 Dec 2019 21:34:38 +0000

In reply to Florida Action Committee. I surely understand they can take years but for the people pre-97 is there not also a "biased" arguement in that anyone sentenced after Oct 1997 is at least told by a court they are being designated as a sexual offender and are told the requirements? I know someone who took a no contest plea in 1994 to standard probation only and 2 months before early termination from probation ( no objection from the state) was made to register in oct 1998. That is unfair and ex post facto for sure. they will be eligible in 2023 or 25 years unless they get the full pardon. good luck on your victory, we are following closely. Thank you for all you do!

By: Jacob

Jacob — Tue, 24 Dec 2019 21:08:46 +0000

I like how, in their original motion to dismiss, FDLE did not even attempt to argue that persons on the registry are dangerous, or that the registry promotes public safety. To my recollection, they barely even attempted to argue the merits at all. Instead, they seemed to argue, the law allows us to do this, plaintiffs are procedurally barred from bringing this action, etc.

Compared to that especially, this complaint is beautifully argued. Even if relief is granted to Does individually, the state will have a hard time fighting these.

By: Florida Action Committee

Florida Action Committee — Tue, 24 Dec 2019 20:12:19 +0000

In reply to anne grant.

No, Anne. It will not only affect people pre-97.
These cases take years. We don’t expect a final ruling for a while.
The case seeks declaratory and injunctive relief. Getting our lives back.

By: anne grant

anne grant — Tue, 24 Dec 2019 20:05:21 +0000

Great job! When do you expect a final ruling? This first ruling will affect only those alleged crime/crimes took place before 1997 correct? Is there any chance you can sue for civil liability if you do indeed win? I would think so with the mental anguish and social stigma that prevented employment etc? But the state will probably claim immunity from civil liability?

By: Florida Action Committee

Florida Action Committee — Tue, 24 Dec 2019 19:23:12 +0000

In reply to Jed. You are incorrect Jed. We discussed this on the call. It is not written only to benefit pre-97 registrants.

By: Jed

Jed — Tue, 24 Dec 2019 17:26:59 +0000

The lawyers did a great job on this for the 6 plaintiffs named.

I don’t understand why the lawsuit was written to only benefit those whos’ offenses were before the 1997 enactment of FSORNA. Why couldn’t it have been a class action suit for all SO’s?

It seems to me it should have been written to benefit all SO’s due to the impossible constraints imposed against anyone on the FSORNA.

I am sure the majority of offenders will not meet the pre 1997 time of their offense to have any benefit should we get a positive verdict.

By: CherokeeJack

CherokeeJack — Tue, 24 Dec 2019 16:48:27 +0000

After reading the entire argument, the use of and/or has me concerned that the Does could be granted relief by the courts but the rest of us would be left to get our own attorneys and use this case to fight individually ?
Not saying I wouldn’t be happy for any win but a win does not seem to be an automatic win for all since the use of and/or . Giving the courts the choice to give the or ( the does ) a win and leaving the rest to fend for themselves.
If I am wrong, correct me and not trying to be negative at all. Just piecing together the legalese and trying to make sense of the that wording. Some cases are won or lost ( even partially ) on one single word. Also sometimes there are small wins where part of a case is found to have merit.
On an ending note, they put together a fantastic case but am sure the state, the FDLE and the lawyers for them will hit back with equally powerful arguments how we are all scum of the Earth and need to be put down like rabid dogs. ( Maybe some of that hate will affect one of the judges with a heart and realize this is more about control than protecting the public interest as a whole )