Sex Offender Registry Requirements Leave Some Facing Stark Choices As Coronavirus Risks Grow

A patchwork approach to the nation’s sex offense registry laws is leaving many of the 900,000 people on the country’s registries with a stark choice as COVID-19 sweeps the country: risk their lives or risk their freedom.

The situation is similar in Florida. A spokesperson for the Florida Action Committee, which advocates for changes to the state’s registry laws, said his organization is getting “dozens of calls a day” from registrants who are both confused and afraid of being penalized because of a situation far outside their control.

READ THE ARTICLE


Discover more from Florida Action Committee

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

43 thoughts on “Sex Offender Registry Requirements Leave Some Facing Stark Choices As Coronavirus Risks Grow

  • April 3, 2020

    Don’t expect anything from DeSatanist. Remember his October 24, 2018 debate with Gillum? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRjRreOomWE

    Listen very carefully between 34:12 and 34:42. Of all the hypothetical crimes he could have mentioned, guess what he brought up?

    [Drops the mic]

    Reply
  • April 3, 2020

    Seminole County (FL) held a presser today discussing some 169 confirmed COVID 19 cases and their requirements for infected people to stay home. Part of that presser was a complaint by county officials who said the infected people are under LE watch via a Sheriff’s intelligence unit but that some of those infected people are noncompliant. Well, now they know how we feel being under LE surveillance or registry requirements. We face this type of LE activity every day, some of us for decades past.

    Reply
  • April 3, 2020

    You can always call FDLE an ask questions. That’s what I usually do. If they get inundated with calls regarding the same subject, they’ll probably issue a press release or take actions to remedy an issue. It’s kinda like having an issue with a restaurant or store: If they’re not aware of the problem, they have no idea they have a problem to address in the first place, so your problem won’t get solved. Obviously, what would ultimately solve 99% of our day to day problems would be abolishing the registry, but realistically, during a nationwide crisis, there may be some concessions that can be made from the top. Maybe now is the time for us to collectively address the Department of Justice, since they are the ultimate controlling body of this whole debacle of misinformation.

    Reply
    • April 8, 2020

      Did that and they sent me right back to the sheriff I was asking questions about. That didn’t work for my current situation but yes FDLE is very good about helping out and should be recognized for their efforts to help us and not lock us back up again

      Reply
  • April 3, 2020

    This should be a legal no-brainer. Longstanding precedent says that when laws conflict or under circumstances that puts different laws in conflict, the conflict is resolved against the government. A person cannot be placed in a position where he has to break one law to comply with another.

    What I find a shame is that someone is going to have to be incarcerated for this for some court – an appellate court in all likelihood – for several years minimum for that court to come to the same conclusion that courts have been coming to for as long as there has been a court system regarding conflicting laws.

    Yes, I know that self-quarantine is not law. It’s an executive order, which has the force of law and carries its own distinctive penalties. The same logic applies.

    Reply
    • April 4, 2020

      You’re right about conflicting laws being resolved in favor of the citizen, but may I point out that this sound line of reasoning is most likely just like everything else…EXCEPT FOR “SEX OFFENDERS”. In the case of HUMANS FORCED TO REGISTER the conflict will most likely always be resolved to the detriment of those forced to register.

      Reply
  • April 3, 2020

    The part about Michigan confuses me. They are well past a deadline that starts the clock for a Federal injunction against their registry. And state police (according to a NARSOL call) have begun treating the injunction as if it’s already in place.

    Yet now, according to the article, Michigan has returned to requiring 40,000 in-person registrations?

    Am I the only one here who recalls a breakthrough Federal ruling on Michigan from two months ago?

    Reply
    • April 3, 2020

      No, it’s very much in mind. I’m not certain but I don’t think the time has expired on that yet.

      Reply
      • April 3, 2020

        They memo regarding pre-2011 registrants not having to register still stands. The state did not revise that memo to make those register again. I’m not sure where the article got its information, but I live in Michigan and I’m pre-2011. The state police will NOT register you if the offense is before 2011

        Reply
      • April 4, 2020

        The clock does not expire for Michigan until sometime in May. However, don’t be surprised if the state has quietly asked for a nice extension due to the Covid-19 outbreak.

        Reply
    • April 3, 2020

      @ Jacob:

      Guessing they haven’t purged their registry of those who have been ordered removed yet, and it probably didn’t come up when the reporter spoke with them.

      Reply
    • April 3, 2020

      @Jacob….the deadline was extended by 17 days from the original March 13th deadline. In light of the COVID 19 pandemic both sides agreed to submit proposals this last Monday and the judge would make a temporary interim ruling for the duration of the crisis. The state/ACLU have 14 days from the end of the crisis to submit the permanent order of judgement which would then set the clock ticking…..the state basically caught a major break….by the way the state’s proposal sucked ass…they basically said it was too dangerous to have all 40,000 of us running around unsupervised. The state police are no longer enforcing verification/registration on pre 2011 registrants or collecting the $50 fee..

      Reply
  • April 3, 2020

    Thank you, FAC spokesperson!

    Helped them put out an amazing (and infuriating) article.

    Reply

Comment Policy

  • PLEASE READ: Comments not adhering to this policy will be removed.
  • Be patient. All comments are moderated before they are published. This takes time.
  • Stay on topic. Comments and links should be relevant to this post.
  • *NEW* CLICK HERE if you have an off-topic comment or link.
  • Be respectful. Do not attack, abuse, or threaten. This includes cussing/yelling (ALL CAPS).
  • Cite. If requested, cite any bold or novel claims of fact or statistics, or your comment may be moderated.
  • *NEW* Be brief. If you have a comment of over 2,000 characters, please e-mail it to us for consideration as a member submission.
  • Reminder: Opinions and statements in comments are neither endorsed nor verified by FAC.
  • Moderation does not equal censorship. See this post for more information

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *